What’s the difference between today and a month ago?

Absolutely nothing. Except a lot of people have lost their jobs.

How about today and nine months ago?

Again, absolutely nothing, except today the Governor has backed off his lock down order. Nothing has changed again, from a public health perspective, but a lot of people have lost their jobs and income. They are struggling to pay for basic necessities like food, rent, heat, and gasoline.

The order, allegedly justified by the public health crisis created by the corona virus that started in China in 2019 (by the way, COVID 19 is a variation on the various strains of flu that we have experienced about every five to ten years throughout my life time), was supposedly based on “solid scientific evidence” that the lock down order would slow the spread of the disease. Either there was no such evidence, or the “solid scientific evidence” supposedly based on research from the supposedly finest public health experts was seriously flawed or totally false. Like the masks and the “social distancing” mandates, the lock down has not “slowed” the spread of… Read More

On Day 1 of his administration, President Joe Biden took a quantum leap toward reversing his predecessor’s efforts to reduce the role of government in the business of private enterprise. In doing so he put the expansion of the nation’s housing supply squarely in Washington, DC’s political gun sights.

This is trouble for California, and the nation.

“Homebuilder concerns about a changing regulatory landscape” may have already altered their plans for next year, says National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) Chairman Chuck Fowke. Indeed, the latest sentiments of homebuilders “suggests somewhat softer numbers are ahead due to rising building costs and an uncertain regulatory climate.”

California is currently suffering from several calamities but none is bigger or more pernicious than the state’s chronic housing supply shortage. Despite faltering demand, due to COVID-19, prices and rents remain sky-high. And, while plenty of state and local constraints still exist, markets here nonetheless welcomed what former President Trump was doing in Washington.

Biden acted quickly to change Trump policies. In addition to curtailing action on over a… Read More

Note: This column was written on November 24th in anticipation of running today. It has one small change which is self-evident.

Joe Biden will soon fulfill his quest that has run for at least 33 years and probably more of becoming President of the United States. As loyal Americans we should fall in line and support him as our president. That is going to be difficult. Let me tell you why.

His pleas for unity within the country ring hollow. Starting with the death of George Floyd we had a series of riots that led to looting and murders across our country. Biden and his eventual V-P pick, Kamala Harris, refused to call them what they were – riots. They refused to call the Democrat-elected officials in charge of the areas and strongly suggest to them that they should put an end to it. While there were serious calls for defunding the police, which Biden had to know was heresy, he stood barely mumbling his displeasure with the idea. He displayed no leadership in defending the basic safety of many of our country’s citizens.

Subsequent to the election he failed another leadership test. He failed to denounce the various outcries for… Read More

Everyone wishes success to our incoming President. Unlike the crowd that hated Trump, Republicans will not be sitting with their voodoo dolls sticking pins into them in hopes of Biden falling on his face. As much as I would like to applaud Biden’s $1.9 Trillion stimulus plan, it would be an act of economic insanity to do such. Let me explain why.

First and foremost, Congress just passed a $900 billion bill to stimulate the economy. Virtually none of that has been spent. Some people have received stimulus checks, but the vast majority of the law is still being dissected. Why would we commit an extensive amount of new funds when we have not even spent the recently approved funds? It is unclear that all the monies were spent from the Cares Act in March 2020. The answer is this is not really economic relief. This is a Democrat hodgepodge of a wish list along with union mollification. That is not for reasons of economics.

One would also expect that Biden’s economic team would have a handle on what is going on in our economy. The facts are common knowledge; they do not need to get transition briefings from the Trump team. Americans made $1 trillion more in the… Read More

In 1982 James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling wrote an article espousing the Broken Windows Theory. Simply stated, it says if you let small crimes and evidence of such become apparent it will lead to larger and more specific crimes. In effect, it gives people a license to continue on misbehaving as they have clear indication that people don’t care to stop the errant behavior. Otherwise, fix the broken windows.

This theory was adopted by then-newly elected Mayor of NYC, Rudy Guiliani, and his police commissioners. Its adoption was responsible for cleaning up our largest city after decades of decay. Unfortunately, Democrats and their Leftist allies never accepted this theory despite the clear results and characterized it as they do everything these days as racist.

This summer Americans sat locked in their homes watching the disintegration of our cities in what was determined by many elected officials and talking heads to be righteous actions. Most Americans did not accept the actions of the miscreants. They did not accept the destruction of businesses and the livelihoods of their fellow citizens along with their employees’ jobs. They detested the burning of… Read More

I didn’t like the President’s speech on January 6th. I thought he was wrong to assert that the Vice President and Congress can pick and choose which electoral votes to count. He was wrong to set such a confrontational tone in a politically tense situation.

But what did he actually say? His exact words were, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” That’s impeachable? That’s called freedom of speech.

He also threatened to oppose candidates in future elections. By the way, that was directed at Republicans like me who had resolved to uphold the constitutional process and protect the Electoral College. So what? That’s called politics.

If we impeached every politician who gave a fiery speech to a crowd of partisans, this Capitol would be deserted. That’s what the President did. That’s all he did. He specifically told the crowd to protest “peacefully and patriotically.” The vast majority of them did.

But every movement has a lunatic fringe.

Suppressing free speech is not the answer; holding rioters accountable for their actions is the… Read More

Mr. Speaker:

What a sad and ominous way to begin the 117th Congress! Hasn’t this body done enough in the last session to divide our country and abuse our Constitution without carrying that damage into the new session?

The 25th Amendment specifically addresses the incapacity of the President to discharge the duties of his office. It was NEVER intended as a political weapon when Congress doesn’t LIKE THE WAY he discharges those duties.

I read his speech. He never suggested rampaging the Capitol and disrupting the Congress. He urged them to “peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

Many of us Republicans joined a bipartisan vote to respect the votes of the Electoral College, despite our suspicions, misgivings and fervent desires.

We did this because the Constitution commanded it and our institutions depended on it.

Today, those same principles should compel a bipartisan vote to oppose this grotesque abuse of the 25th Amendment.

Last week, the majority argued the President tried to abuse the Constitution to overturn the votes of the Electoral College. He asserted no direct power; rather, he urged the… Read More

As the supply of California housing dwindles more and more local officials – desperate to do something in response – are wrongly placing affordability mandates on new development and, thereby, killing production.

These mandates – the most popular being inclusionary zoning – demand that locals won’t approve a housing project until the developer agrees to provide a certain percentage of its units at below-market prices or rents. (The below-market homes are usually built on site – to socially engineer the residency.)

Although there is lukewarm opposition at the Capitol to imposing this policy statewide, it has become the law in about 140 local communities around the state – usually enjoying the force of a locally authorizing ordinance. Ironically, as the housing problem worsens, the mandate is increasing in popularity.

As it exists here in California, inclusionary zoning works like this: Let’s say you wanted to build 100 homes on 30 acres you own. (When you bought the land it was already zoned for single-family housing so at least that part of the seemingly endless approval process is behind you.) You look to sell the homes anywhere from… Read More