THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CALIFORNIA - This site is dedicated to exposing the continuing Marxist Revolution in California and the all around massive stupidity of Socialists, Luddites, Communists, Fellow Travelers and of Liberalism in all of its ugly forms.

"It was a splendid population - for all the slow, sleepy, sluggish-brained sloths stayed at home - you never find that sort of people among pioneers - you cannot build pioneers out of that sort of material. It was that population that gave to California a name for getting up astounding enterprises and rushing them through with a magnificent dash and daring and a recklessness of cost or consequences, which she bears unto this day - and when she projects a new surprise the grave world smiles as usual and says, "Well, that is California all over."

- - - - Mark Twain (Roughing It)

Monday, June 10, 2019

High-Speed Rail took land and did not pay

Corruptus in Extremis

(L.A. Times)  -  John Diepersloot squinted under a bright Central Valley sun, pointing to the damage to his fruit orchard that came with the California bullet train.

He lost 70 acres of prime land. Rail contractors left mounds of rubble along his neat rows. Irrigation hoses are askew. A sophisticated canopy system for a kiwi field, supported by massive steel cables, was torn down.

But what really irritates Diepersloot is the $250,000 that he paid out of his own pocket for relocating wells, removing trees, building a road and other expenses.

“I am out a quarter-million bucks on infrastructure, and they haven’t paid a dime for a year,” he said. “I don’t have that kind of money.”

Up and down the San Joaquin Valley, farmers have similar stories. The state can take land with a so-called order of possession by the Superior Court while it haggles over the price.

But farmers often face out-of-pocket costs for lost production, road replacement, repositioning of irrigation systems and other expenses, which the state agrees to pay before the final settlement.

Those payments and even some payments for land have stretched out to three years. State officials have offered endless excuses for not paying, the farmers say.

Eminent domain, the legal process by which government takes private land, is complicated enough, particularly in California with a maze of agencies involved. But the rail authority’s constantly changing plans, thin state staff and reliance on outside attorneys have made it more difficult, some say.

“They are bogged down,” said Mark Wasser, an eminent domain attorney in Sacramento who has represented more than 70 farmers and other businesses losing land to the rail project. “I would draw an analogy to Napoleon’s invasion of Russia.”

Read More . . . .

Tuesday, May 21, 2019

Free health care for illegal aliens

Democrats say "Fuck You"
to Americans Citizens

  • American citizens of all colors and ethnic backgrounds were told by Democrats to go fuck themselves and open their wallets to pay for every possible need of millions and millions of illegal aliens.
  • But the moron Sheeple voters just bend over and vote Democrat. Voters who are that stupid deserve the coming shit-fest.

(ABC News)  -  . . . . . have prompted California lawmakers to consider proposals that would make the state the first in the nation to offer government-funded health care to adult immigrants living in the country illegally. But the decision on who to cover may come down to cost. 

Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom wants to spend about $98 million per year to cover low-income immigrants between the ages of 19 and 25 who are living in the country illegally. 

The state Assembly has a bill that would cover all immigrants in California living in the country illegally over the age of 19. But Newsom has balked at that plan because of its estimated $3.4 billion price. 

"There's 3.4 billion reasons why it is a challenge," he said. 

The state Senate wants to cover adults ages 19 to 25, plus seniors 65 and older. That bill's sponsor, Sen. Maria Elana Durazo, scoffed at cost concerns, noting the state has a projected $21.5 billion budget surplus. 

"When we have, you know, a good budget, then what's the reason for not addressing it?" she said. 

The Senate and Assembly will finalize their budget proposals this week before beginning negotiations with the governor. State law says a budget has to be passed by June 15 or lawmakers forfeit their pay. 

At stake, according to legislative staffers, are the 3 million people left in California who don't have health insurance. About 1.8 million of them are immigrants in the country illegally. Of those, about 1.26 million have incomes low enough to qualify them for the Medi-Cal program. 

"Symbolically, this is quite significant. This would be establishing California as a counter to federal policies, both around health care and immigration," said Larry Levitt, senior vice president for health reform at the Kaiser Family Foundation. 

If enacted, it could prompt yet another collision with the Trump administration, which has proposed a rule that could hinder immigrants' residency applications if they rely on public assistance programs such as Medicaid. 

The proposed rule from the Department of Homeland Security says the goal is to make sure "foreign nationals do not become dependent on public benefits for support." 

California is also considering a measure requiring everyone in the state to purchase health insurance. People who refuse would have to pay a penalty, and the money would go toward helping middle-income residents purchase private health insurance plans. 

"We're going to penalize the citizens of this state that have followed the rules, but we're going to let somebody who has not followed the rules come in here and get the services for free. I just think that's wrong," Republican state Sen. Jeff Stone said about coverage of people in the U.S. illegally. 

Many immigrants who are in the country illegally are already enrolled for some government-funded programs, but they only cover emergencies and pregnancies. 

Serrano was one of hundreds of immigrant activists who came to the Capitol on Monday for "Immigrant Day of Action." She and her husband spent the day meeting with lawmakers, sharing Angeles' story. 

"The conversation that I have is about the cost," she said, describing her interactions with lawmakers. "The conversation we want to have is about our families."

Read More . . . .

Thursday, May 2, 2019

San Bernardino factory to close, citing California costs

(The Sun)  -  D&W Fine Pack, which makes foil and hard paper food packaging items, will cease manufacturing operations at its San Bernardino facility, citing the high cost of operating a factory in California.
The California Employment Development Department was notified Wednesday that 94 workers would be terminated on July 19.
The distribution arm of the Georgia Boulevard facility will remain in operation, according to a company statement. Frances Rizzo, director of communications, said in an email received Monday, April 29 that will consist of six team members and one support team member.
The Wood Dale, Ill.-based company has a factory in Fort Wayne, Ind. and will consolidate its manufacturing at that location. According to the statement, some manufacturing and administrative employees in San Bernardino will have a chance to apply for jobs in Fort Wayne.
The Indiana factory will hire an additional 100 workers, the company said. Rizzo said employees who opt to relocate would receive a moving allowance that is dictated by the company’s relocation policy and that employees would be paid market rate for work in Fort Wayne.
“The rising cost of manufacturing in California combined with a shift in market dynamics for single-use disposable packaging were factors we considered in making our decision to consolidate these operations,” the statement read.
D&W Fine Pack makes containers used for carry-out food items as well as utensils, straws and stirrers.

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

Will Newsom end oil drilling in California?

Retard Alert

  • The retarded Leftist Democrat base wants to abolish high paying oil industry jobs and at the same time eliminate the tax income to the state that those jobs produce.

(Tribune)  -  California’s legacy of oil drilling should be just that, many environmentalists argue – relegated to the history books.

They are urging Gov. Gavin Newsom to ban new oil and gas drilling in California and completely phase out fossil fuel extraction in one of the nation’s top petroleum-producing – and gasoline-consuming – states.

At the least, they want the state to impose buffer zones prohibiting new oil and gas wells near schools, hospitals and residential neighborhoods and also require monitoring for potentially hazardous emissions from abandoned or plugged wells, proposals already being considered by state lawmakers.

“It sure would make us happy if he made a big splash about this. It’s month four. People are being very patient. By month six, patience may wear thin,” said Sierra Club California Director Kathryn Phillips.

Phillips said her organization and other groups that support curtailing oil production in California have met informally with Newsom administration officials. While Newsom has not made any promises, expectations remain high, she said.

Newsom, who served on the State Lands Commission for eight years, says he’s well versed in the issues surrounding on-shore and off-shore oil drilling in California and said he would announce his administration’s detailed strategy on energy policy in the next few weeks.

The governor was coy about core aspects of that policy, and declined to say if it would ban the controversial practice of hydraulic fracking, a process that uses drilling and large volumes of high-pressure water to extract gas and oil deposits.

“I’m taking a very pragmatic look at it, in scoping this,” Newsom told the Los Angeles Times last week. “It’s also an inclusive scoping because it includes people in the industry, that have jobs; communities that are impacted from an environmental justice prism but also from an economic justice prism. It’s a challenging issue. There’s a reason Gov. Brown used a lot of dexterity on this issue.”

The Democratic governor emphasized that he would not be “exercising passivity.” But Newsom also said that, despite his strong support for putting California on a path to a 100 percent renewable energy supply, it would be unrealistic to think that California can just stop its dependence on oil and gas.

“One cannot just turn off the switch. One cannot just immediately abut against a century of practice and policy,” Newsom said.

Read More . . . .

Monday, April 1, 2019

California may be reaching the point of ‘taxuration’


The phenomenon of “taxuration” occurs when taxpayers are so saturated with new tax-hike proposals that they start to rebel.  According to a new poll, taxuration may have finally arrived in California, if hasn’t been here already.
Last week, the Public Policy Institute of California released the findings of a survey showing that a majority of likely voters in the state aren’t very happy with the tax burdens they are forced to pay. Most Californians say the state’s tax system is unfair, which is a reversal from the same question asked in March 2017. More importantly, a solid majority of likely voters in California think they pay more taxes to state and local governments than they should.
While perception is often not correlated with reality, it appears that Californians have a fairly realistic understanding of the tax burden in the state relative to other states.  According to the report, “The public’s perceptions are somewhat in line with fiscal facts: California’s state and local tax collections per capita in 2015 were 10th-highest in the nation,” citing the left leaning Tax Policy Center.  Note that another think tank, the Tax Foundation, ranks California even higher in tax burden.

It shouldn’t be surprising to anyone paying attention that citizens are reaching the breaking point on tax hikes. Every day seems to bring a new big tax-hike proposal emanating from the state Capitol.  Just one example that popped up this week was a proposal to bring back California’s estate tax, which was repealed by voters in 1982. Other tax-hike proposals in the mix include higher income tax rates, a water tax, a soda tax, sales tax on services and a so-called “carbon intensity” tax.  (Don’t ask.)
Moreover, when the California Legislature doesn’t want to do the dirty work of raising taxes directly, it is adept at enacting statutes authorizing local governments to raise taxes. The legislature has engaged in this practice for decades since the passage of Proposition 13, starting with the infamous Mello-Roos taxes on new developments.  The most recent – and dangerous – example of this is Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 1 – which would lower the vote needed to pass a range of bonds and special taxes, including parcel taxes, from two-thirds down to just 55 percent. If approved by voters (constitutional amendments must be approved by a simple majority of the statewide electorate) ACA 1 will leave the door open to billions in new local taxes and bond debt.
And let’s not forget the tax hikes put on the ballot by progressives who never met a tax they didn’t like.  Chief among these is the notorious “split roll” proposal, which has already qualified for the 2020 ballot. It would strip Proposition 13’s protection against higher property taxes from owners of business properties.
The tax-and-spend lobby will argue that Californians actually like higher taxes as evidenced by the failure to repeal the big increases in the gas and car tax passed in 2017.  But the failure of Proposition 6 last November was the result of a deceptive ballot label courtesy of our Attorney General, who doesn’t hesitate to put his thumb on the scales of justice to benefit his political backers.
The reality is that Californians have likely had enough.  Even PPIC president Mark Baldassare interpreted the poll results as troubled water for the tax raisers, noting, “The trends say to me that the governor and Legislature should proceed with caution when it comes to raising revenues or restructuring taxes in light of the perceived tax burden.”
That may be the understatement of the year.
Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association


Friday, March 1, 2019

Calif. math prof applicants better have 'diversity contributions' on their resumes

Talent Mean Nothing. Towing The Leftist Line Means Everything

  • Leftist loons at government run universities could care less if you are an expert in a field. All that matters is that when they snap their fingers you do the Politically Correct Dance.

Applicants looking to teach mathematics at the University of California campuses are evaluated based on their past contributions to “diversity.”

According to the current job postings for these positions, applications must include a “diversity statement” detailing the applicants’ “past and/or potential contributions to diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

Several listings for tenure-track or tenured mathematics professor positions at University of California campuses included the stipulation, including listings for positions at UCLA, UC San Diego, and UC Irvine

The University of California San Diego offers applicants a detailed explanation of how to construct such a statement, noting that the document should be one to two pages, and encouraging applicants “to provide specific information on the motivation, duration, and impact of their outreach and mentoring activities.”

“The purpose of the statement is to identify candidates who have the professional skills, experience, and/or willingness to engage in activities that will advance our campus equity, diversity and inclusion goals,” the university explains.

A detailed explanation of the evaluation process for these statements is also available from UCSD.  This document notes the purpose of the diversity statement as a method of evaluating a candidate’s “awareness of the barriers that exist for groups historically under-represented in math and science, “past efforts in diversity and outreach activities; and “future plans for diversity and outreach activities.”

The university notes that of these considerations, “past efforts are given far greater weight than merely showing awareness of barriers or stating future plans.”

More at Campus Reform