Orange County Congress of Republicans

11/03/2024

By Jon Coupal EXCERPT There is no dispute that Proposition 5, if enacted, will result in higher property taxes for California homeowners. Want proof?

Here’s the official analysis from the Legislative Analyst: “Recent local election results suggest that an additional 20 percent to 50 percent of local bond measures would have passed under Proposition 5’s lower voter approval requirement. Those measures would have raised a couple billion dollars over many years. A lower voter approval requirement also could mean local governments propose more measures.”

To recap, Prop. 5 would lower the vote threshold for local bonds from two-thirds to 55%. The two-thirds vote requirement for local general obligation bonds was adopted in 1879 as a protection against excessive debt at the local level repaid by property owners.

There is no dispute that Proposition 5, if enacted, will result in higher property taxes for California homeowners.

11/03/2024

By Susan Shelley Excerpt On Tuesday, [California] voters will decide whether people in the future, possibly including themselves, will be forced to sell their homes because property taxes are skyrocketing year after year, despite Proposition 13.
We will decide whether millions of Californians who live in single-unit rentals, such as individual houses and condos, will be evicted in the future because the owner wants out of the rental housing business.
We will decide whether nearly a billion dollars more of state tax revenue will have to be paid to Wall Street investors, every year for decades, before the current needs of California residents can be met.
We will decide whether the courts can force the state prison system and county jails to pay the minimum wage to inmates who work, at a potential cost to future taxpayers of billions of dollars per year. …
[V]ote no on Proposition 5, Prop. 33, Prop. 2, Prop. 4, [and] Prop. 6.
Proposition 5 makes it easier to raise property taxes. It slashes the two-thirds vote requirement to approve local debt (bonds) down to 55%. Local bonds are repaid by adding extra charges to property tax bills. Prop. 5 makes it easier to pass those bonds for countless projects and purposes that often could be funded from the taxes you already pay, if the budget was prioritized.
Prop. 5 gets around Proposition 13. It’s a turbo engine for future property tax increases that will blast through the 1978 voter-approved measure’s 2% annual cap. After a few years of gunning that engine, tax hike after tax hike, people will start losing their homes. The future you save may be your own. Vote no on 5.
Proposition 33 would take away a law that protects property owners, including individuals who own a house or condo that they rent out. The 1995 Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act says cities may not impose rent control on these single-unit rentals or enact other types of unreasonable rent control.
If Costa-Hawkins goes away, so will millions of rental units in California. Many owners of single-unit or multi-family rental properties will decide to withdraw those units from the market — or never build them in the first place — rather than lose money every month. California needs more housing, not less. Vote no on Prop. 33.
Prop. 2 is $10 billion of borrowing for school facilities, and Prop. 4 is another $10 billion of borrowing for climate-change programs. But this money will not teach reading or stop the climate from changing. It will just run up interest charges that nearly double the cost.
Proposition 6 … means inmates could not be required to work (as they currently are under state law). …

In search of a time machine

11/03/2024

Orange County Register endorses Matt Gunderson for the 49th Congressional District -- He is also endorsed by the Orange County Congress of Republicans.

EXCERPT [W]e take seriously the candidacy of local businessman Matt Gunderson. Socially moderate, fiscally conservative, Gunderson understands the need for fiscal responsibility. “Reducing the national debt is straightforward: stop wasting taxpayer dollars on pet projects and pork-barrel spending that only benefit a select few instead of the broader American population,” he argues.

He also understands the power of the free market, “A free economy thrives when businesses are allowed to operate without government-imposed tariffs and trade regulations that stifle innovation and growth. Government intervention in price control and business trade only slows down progress and adds unnecessary layers of bureaucracy.”

Overall, we think Gunderson’s sensibilities will serve the district well and help moderate, in small part, the GOP. He has our endorsement.

09/24/2024

Orange County Congress of Republicans endorsements

CD 40: Congresswoman Young Kim
CD 41: Congressman Ken Calvert
CD 45: Congresswoman Michelle Steel
CD 46: David Pan
CD 47: Scott Baugh
CD 49: Matt Gunderson
SD 37: Steven “Steve” Choi
AD 72: Assemblywoman Diane Dixon
AD 74: Assemblywoman Laurie Davies
==
Capistrano Unified District
Area 1 Jennifer Adnmas
Area 2 Lisa Zollinger
Area 3 Lisa Davis
Area 5 Sonia Terwiske
==
Huntington Beach City School District
Brian Burley
==
Oceanview School District
David Clifford
==
Santa Ana Unified School District
District 2 Lloyd Boucher-Reyes
==
U.S. President and Vice President: Donald J. Trump & J.D. Vance
U.S. Senate: Steve Garvey

03/03/2024

Democratic President Harry Truman (1949) on income redistribution:

“Jesse James was a modern-day Robin Hood. He stole from the rich and gave to the poor, which, in general, is not a bad policy.”

"All of history is mystery," Dale L. Walker says, and he proves his point in this lively, humorous--and rational--approach to the West's greatest puzzles. Did Davy Crockett, for example, go down swinging Ol' Betsy, defending the ramparts of the Alamo--or was he captured? Who is buried in Jesse James...

02/06/2024

Los Angeles Times: Republican Senate contender and former baseball All-Star Steve Garvey is getting a campaign boost from an unlikely source — Democratic Rep. Adam B. Schiff, a top rival in the race for the seat once held by the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

Schiff’s campaign released an ad portraying Garvey, a political novice considered a long shot to win the coveted seat, as his greatest competitor in a close 2024 Senate race that features two other top Democrats: Reps. Katie Porter of Irvine and Barbara Lee of Oakland.

“Two leading candidates for Senate. Two very different visions for California,” a narrator intones, noting later that Garvey “is too conservative for California” and voted for Donald Trump twice.
While the message will turn off Democratic voters in the state, it may increase the former baseball player’s appeal to Republican voters — as it is designed to do. ...

“It’s pretty clear Schiff is trying to bolster Garvey’s credibility as his opponent in the runoff and then Schiff can take the rest of the summer off,” said Democratic political consultant Garry South, who ran Gov. Gray Davis’ successful 2002 reelection campaign. ...

[S]imilar efforts have been successfully used in past California campaigns, including in the 2018 gubernatorial race. Democrat Gavin Newsom’s campaign elevated little-known Republican John Cox’s gubernatorial bid by ostensibly criticizing him over his support for Trump and gun rights, and his antiabortion views in an ad.

Republican voters coalesced behind Cox, giving the businessman a strong enough finish in the primary to edge Democrat and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to finish second and face off against Newsom in the November election.

Days before Californians will be mailed ballots, Rep. Adam B. Schiff's latest ad acts as if Rep. Katie Porter doesn't exist.

01/24/2024

California Globe Excerpt: The latest polls going into Monday showed that while Schiff still has a commanding lead with 25% of likely voters, Garvey has also pulled ahead, coming in with 18% of the vote. This makes him a full 5 points ahead of Porter, with 13% of the vote, and Lee, who has fallen even further down to only 8%. Polls in the previous few months have also had both Schiff and Garvey gaining support, while Lee and Porter have slowly lost support.
Each candidate also had clear plans on Monday. Schiff, with a huge lead, came in wanting to keep his massive lead. Garvey, with his first debate and first time heading toe to toe with the other candidates, wanted to project more as a candidate to help solidify his lead over Porter and Lee. ...
Garvey: “Early on I thought this was the heartbeat of America. California with its vibrancy was great. Suddenly one party started taking over, and the vibrancy left. It’s time to step up against them. We need to get back to to that California.”
Next, the moderators asked the candidates to rank the economy from 1 to 10.
Garvey: “The economy is a 5 out of 10 at most. I’ve gone around the state, they poured their hearts out, and they said everything is fine and pay more taxes because you live in California. 88% of Californians feel that they are losing money or just getting by. We need to fix that.
Lee: “So many people in California are struggling. Move minimum wage to a living wage. We’ve created millions of jobs, but they still need a heck of a lot more involved to get them to our communities. $117,000 is barely getting by for a family of four in the Bay Area. 6 out of 10.
Porter: “I say it’s a 5 out of 10, but it’s an average. Rich Californians have a 10, those with generational wealth. Others are well below 5. We need to address wealth inequality. I’m the only one on this stage to not take corporate PAC money. ...
Garvey: “It gets back to the economy. We start to encourage more housing by going after inflation. Let’s get to the point where we cut energy cuts by opening our oil and gas pipes. Wall street and main street are completely different. Lets get back to a vibrant economy.”
Porter: “We are being cheated in foreclosure by big banks. Housing affordability is my top issue. The problem is career politicians catering to their big bank donors. We need more affordable housing for all. We cannot have a grown economy if we can’t keep people here, and we can’t do that if they can’t afford housing.”
Lee: “I believe housing is a human right, and I have called for legislation to be a human right. We need to make college tuition free in California to help students afford more. Students can’t even dream of owning a home here.”
Porter: “Medicare for all declares the highest quality care at the lowest price point with the most choices. $17 of every $100 is spent by insurance companies on administrative costs. Medicare for al is only $2 out of every $100.”
Garvey: We are never stronger than when we have competition. Medicare for all would be a strain on the economy. We need a competitive balance. We need to look at Obamacare and refine it. Good competitors win.”
Schiff: “I fought to extend the affordable care plan. I prefer Medicare for all, but in a way so you can keep your doctor. We need good access for our kids and families. Medicare for all would work.”
Lee: “I believe healthcare should be a human right. It should not be competitive. I was one of the original co-sponsors of Medicare for all. I helped negotiate the affordable care act. We need Medicare for all to make medical decisions by the individual. We don’t need a bottom line for healthcare.”
Porter, a large defender of healthcare for all, rebutted both Lee and Garvey. On Lee, she responded that although Lee strove for changes for years to make Medicare for all possible, she had never gotten it off the ground. And for Garvey, she went after his stance on competition. Schiff, meanwhile, had a pointed rebuttal at Porter, saying she was only talking about advancing Medicare legislation while he himself had actually pushed legislation forward in Congress for expanded health care. ...
Garvey [said] that he voted for Trump twice because he was the best president and went after Schiff’s words against him by saying it was “Identity politics at its finest.” He also stated that the country was safer under Trump. ... [Garvey called Schiff a liar for his claims about Trump-Russia collusion.]
Lee: “It’s a shame and disgrace that we have so many people homeless in our state. We need a national eviction policy and more affordable housing built. Federal government needs to invest more here.”
Porter: “Direct result of Washington’s failure to write housing policies based on people, not banking. Fully funding section 8 vouchers and eviction protections. The solution to homelessness is housing.”
Garvey: “First thing I’ll do is an audit. Where did the 30 billion go? They talk about Washington being the problem. All three of them have been those people from Washington for years.”
Schiff: "Housing is a human right. It pains me to see so many living on the street.”
Abortion
Garvey: “As an elected official I will support the voice of the people of California. On other issues I will look at them. We need to build a consensus and listen. I would not vote for a federal ban on abortion.”
Garvey: “My three opponents have people who they owe, donors. I owe no one. My earmarks would be based on needs to protect the sovereignty of California. I don’t call them earmarks. I call them necessities.”
Garvey ” If you break the law, it is illegal. Where have you [the three Democratic congress members on the stage] all been for the last three years? The surge of immigrants has brought a stress on America, and they [[the three Democratic congress members on the stage] let this happen. You [the three Democratic congress members on the stage] can’t look the people of California in the eye and tell them there isn’t a problem.”
Porter: “We need immigrants. We need farmworkers and doctors and people coming in, but we also need a compassionate immigration system.”
Garvey: “Climate change is proven. We need to work together to solve it. But we can’t cut off gas and oil. We can’t say in ten years you need to buy an electric car.”
Lee: “I support the transition to electric vehicles, but a lot of people can’t afford it. We need climate policies that won’t leave low income people behind.”
Agriculture
Garvey: “We need to support farmers, with better water technology and deregulation. We need to go back into investing in farming and ranching.” ...
Garvey [began] to hold his own more and more as the debate went on. Everyone was attacking him, and he soon found that his best defense was a straight answer. When he couldn’t give a clear answer on [supporting] Trump, they all went after him. When it got to the abortion question, they started doing the same.But as soon as he said he wouldn’t support a federal ban, the three had no where to go. Porter and Lee, in particular, looked annoyed that he had pretty much cut off their talking point.
When [Garvey] was clear on climate change and earmarks, he started going against [the three Democratic congress members on the stage]. ... [Garvey] found his footing after he calmed down and found a way to shut the others down when they tried to rebut.

2024 1st U.S. Senate Debate (Photo: Evan Symon for California Globe) The Globe Covers the First 2024 California U.S. Senate Debate The top four Senate candidates face off in L.A. By Evan Symon, January 22, 2024 9:47 pm 22 Jan 2024 9:47 pm Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA), Congresswoman Katie Porter (D...

01/13/2024

By Chester E. Finn, Jr. EXCERPT [T]he Department of Education [has been] pumping out billions of dollars for "school improvement" programs that yielded meager results. It turns out to be extremely difficult to turn around a low-performing school, save when the interventions are so drastic — changing the staff, replacing the curriculum, transforming it into a charter school, and so forth — that few districts or states have the guts to follow through. Instead, they typically opted for the mildest permissible interventions, such as telling the current school team to draw up an "improvement plan." …

Joe Biden and Secretary Miguel Cardona helped not at all, for they've shown almost zero interest in student achievement while showering attention on every form of equity and shoveling billions of "Covid-19 recovery dollars" into public schools with little obligation to spend it on recovering student achievement.
The Biden team reflects an old, pre-Coleman, LBJ-style approach to education (always the preferred approach of teachers' unions), which is to go heavy on resources and equality. …

One might think the acute learning losses wrought by the pandemic over the past several years and our inability thus far to correct them might jar policy leaders back to school and student outcomes as the foremost goal. But that's not happening; instead, we continue to soften.

American elementary and secondary education remains unwell. Student achievement is lagging, learning gaps are wider than ever, too many graduates are unready for college or work, and chronic absenteeism has become a plague. But there is an even deepe...

01/11/2024

Editorial in the Orange County Register EXCERPT Not again. Affirmative action was prohibited in California in 1996 when voters passed Proposition 209, 55% to 45%. That was affirmed in 2020 when Proposition 209, which would have repealed 209, was defeated by a bigger margin, 57% to 43%.
Assembly Constitutional Amendment 7 is by Assemblymember Corey Jackson, D-Moreno Valley. It would put an amendment of Prop. 209 before voters, supposedly getting around the strict prohibition of affirmative action. According to him, “ACA 7 focuses on enabling evidence-based, culturally specific programs to reduce disparities among specific groups, including marginalized genders and s*xual orientations.” It passed the Assembly last year and currently is in the Senate.
Let’s remember the exact wording of Prop. 209: “The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, s*x, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.”
“ACA 7 violates both Prop. 209 and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,” Andrew Quinio told us; he’s an Orange County attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation’s equality and opportunity practice. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees all Americans “the equal protection of the laws.”
He also pointed to last June’s Harvard admissions court case on affirmative action, which also involved the University of North Carolina. It held, “Harvard’s and UNC’s admissions programs violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” And he said, if ACA 7 is passed and put before the voters, his foundation “definitely” would get involved in the legal opposition. ...
A UC Berkeley poll just before Prop. 16 was defeated found it was opposed 53% to 35% by whites, 50% go 39% by Asians, 42% to 40% by Latinos and 74% to 22% by Native Americans. Only Black Californians backed it, 58% to 33%.
Affirmative action is intended to give more opportunities to Black Californians and Latino Californians, especially, to attend state colleges and universities. But it masks the real problem: the “achievement gap” of Latinos and Black Californians, which actually is caused by the poor quality of the public schools they attend compared to the generally better schools attended by whites and Asians. One only need compare Santa Ana Unified with Irvine Unified.
The solution there is to improve the schooling all Californians by increasing the number of public charter schools, currently stalled at only 11% of enrollment. It’s also time to advance Arizona-style universal school choice, in which parents receive a voucher to be used as tuition at any school, public or private.

Not again. Affirmative action was prohibited in California in 1996 when voters passed Proposition 209, 55% to 45%. That was affirmed in 2020 when Proposition 209, which would have repealed 209, was…

01/10/2024

Wayne LaPierre, head of the National Rifle Association, steps down.

The most influential civil rights leader of the past half-century, Wayne LaPierre, stepped down from his post on Friday, and few Americans noticed.