In his famous book, Socialism, written in 1932, Ludwig Von Mises had an interesting insight. He said, 80 years ago, in the midst of the Nazi takeover of Germany, that “it is unreasonable to expect” an association of entrepreneurs, or an association that relies on entrepreneurs as its principal means of support (read the California Chamber of Commerce, or any other number of “pro-business” associations) to take a principled stand against Socialism, mainly, he said, because that is not what they do. Their job is to build their business, not fight long term political battles, and building their business means overcoming, not fighting, government obstacles to growth. How right he was. That comment changed my view of my role in the Legislature. I knew that if it was unreasonable to expect that kind of behavior from the business community in 1932, when they were facing the threat of Adolph Hitler, how could I expect them to take the exact opposite approach when fighting Willie or Jerry Brown, or anyone of the string of speakers of the Assembly, including John Perez currently.

The business community wouldn’t fight, but I would, I decided,… Read More

Every election cycle, seeking to vindicate the rights of private citizens who, at great time and expense, have qualified an initiative for the statewide ballot (often a subject matter that has no chance of making it through the dysfunctional Legislature), against a partisan Attorney General who has crafted a biased summary of the proposed measure.

The Elections Code tasks the Attorney General with preparing “a true and impartial statement of the purpose” of any measure appearing on the statewide ballot. The Attorney General’s statement cannot “be an argument, nor be likely to create prejudice, for or against the proposed measure.” The ballot label, title and summary prepared for Proposition 32 by Attorney General Kamala Harris failed this basic standard, which unfortunately is no surprise.

Attorney General Harris’ proposed ballot language described Proposition 32 as restricting or limiting contributions to candidates from corporations, unions and government contractors, and as restricting the collection of campaign contributions from corporate employees and union members through payroll deduction. These… Read More

San Diego Politics & Media Mashup

I’m not sure what’s worse: suggesting the Republican Party is racist or calling someone a criminal while offering no evidence to support the claim.

Congressman Bob Filner, running for mayor in San Diego, did both of those things in a span of a few days.

Adding fuel to the fire was local labor Lorena Gonzalez. More on her in a minute. First, Filner.

At a mayoral debate Thursday, Filner played the race card while refuting a point by City Councilman and mayoral candidate Carl DeMaio.

“They (the Republican Party) are a party that does not believe that the people of color in this nation deserve an equal chance, they do not believe that Mexico is worthy of respect as a nation,” Filner said, according to KPBS.

Monday on KOGO, host LaDona Harvey noted that Filner basically accused her and a whole bunch of other people of being racist without offering any proof.

Within the hour, Filner was doing the same thing —… Read More

Notice: Undefined index: file in /srv/www/blog.flashreport.org/releases/20130218155602/wp-includes/media.php on line 1676

As if her job isn’t already hard enough, the task for Assembly Republican Leader Connie Conway got a bit tougher yesterday. You see she, along with her counterpart, State Senate Republican Leader Bob Huff, are spending a lot of their time convincing potential donors that it if we want to stop tax increases in California, it is critical that enough Republicans occupy each chamber of the legislature to block the two-thirds vote threshold required to raise taxes under the State Constitution. This pitch, by the GOP leaders, is pretty persuasive — especially when you consider how aggressively Capitol Democrats try to raise taxes. However, the presupposition of their pitch is that… Read More

The trial lawyers and radical environmentalists took it in the shorts over the weekend as the California Republican Party voted overwhelmingly to oppose Prop 37, the ballot measure that would ostensibly require the labeling of “genetically modified food.”

I engaged in the battle against Proposition 37 after receiving an email from a political operative for the “Yes on 37” campaign ahead of this weekend’s state party convention and it became clear the liberals were going to make a play.

During my four years as state party chairman, the liberals would occasionally show up and lobby the party to back one of their big government propositions if they thought they might be able to get away with it. Fortunately, we stopped them every time.

Prop 37 of course isn’t really about food – it’s about lawsuits. It would require food sold at the grocery store, convenience store or other shop to bear a label if it contains genetically modified ingredients (as though genetically modified foods are potentially harmful, which of course they are not).

The real objective behind Prop 37 is to open the floodgates for a new round of lawsuits against… Read More

BURBANK — The California Republican Party convention is taking place this weekend in Burbank, CA. While there have been guffaws and snickers about the relevance of the Caalifornia Republicans, the party made significant gains in the June primary, but this was largely ignored by most of the California media.

The convention agenda is not packed as full as previous meetings given that many politicians are campaigning for November races, but there is still plenty of red meat being offered.

Repeal Obamacare

A forum on “The Future of Health Care” was an excellent panel presentation to a packed room. Health care insiders presented facts about the impacts of Obamacare, and John Eastman discussed Obamacare following the recent Supreme Court decision.

Eastman, an attorney, Professor and Dean at Chapman Law School, and former candidate for State Attorney General, asked audience members, “What happened on June 28, who did it, and why?”

“There was this little case up at the Supreme Court,” Eastman said. “28 states sued the federal government. Eastman said that liberals predicted case wouldn’t even get to Supreme Court.… Read More

The California Air Resources Board seems to be on everyone’s list of what not to do in state government. Charged with implementing AB 32, the California’s Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, CARB is under increasing scrutiny for operating as a rogue agency, appearing to be accountable to no one.

All attempts to reel in the agency have failed, including another attempt to audit its operations and finances–thanks to Democratic legislators who clearly are getting marching orders from Assembly and Senate leaders.

A Joint Legislative Audit Committee hearing on Wednesday brought CARB close to accountability with the threat of the six-month state audit. But the committee chairman, Assemblyman Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, surprised everyone when he nixed the plan after having made the pretense that he was on board.

CARB and AB 32

In 2006, the Legislature promised that AB 32 would help clean the environment while still protecting the economy. Supportive legislators promised that utility and gasoline costs would not increase with the implementation of the climate change law.

The opposite has happened, and businesses are now… Read More

Prior to joining the Legislature, I was a lawyer for over 13 years, with a primary emphasis in business disputes. I still work as a lawyer since I left the Legislature for the last six years. Of course, while in the Legislature, I served on the Senate and Assembly Judiciary Committees, given my experience in the law and litigation.

Why is that important? Because during my time as a lawyer, I had more than one client weave conspiracy theories about what was going on in their cases. My response always was: What is the evidence? What can we prove? What documents or witnesses do you have? Of course, there are two types of evidence admissible in a court action, direct evidence and circumstantial. Both are of equal weight in a court action. Direct evidence can best be described as Jack sees John shoot Ted. Jack’s testimony about what he saw is direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence is Jack hears a gunshot, runs into the room, and see John standing over a dead Ted, holding a smoking gun. It is this type of circumstantial evidence that always leads people to look “for the smoking gun” in any conspiracy type claims. It also leads those who… Read More