California Government Thread (General Stupidity)

[gopsdragon]

U.S. National - AP

33,000 Sex Offenders Elude California
Tue Jan 7, 9:55 PM ET Add U.S. National - AP to My Yahoo!


By KIM CURTIS, Associated Press Writer

SAN JOSE, Calif. - California has lost track of more than 33,000 convicted sex offenders, despite a law requiring rapists and child molesters to register each year for inclusion in the Megan's Law database.


AP Photo



"We don't know where they are," acknowledged Margaret Moore, who until recently ran California's sex offender registry.


Sex offenders are not checking in with law enforcement, which in most cases is a felony. And many overworked police departments are not following up.


Experts say sex offender databases nationwide have fallen short of their promise.


"It's not only in California," said Laura Ahearn, executive director of Parents for Megan's Law, a national victims' rights group. "We're expecting sex offenders to be reporting their addresses and that's the problem."


According to 2002 data provided to The Associated Press after repeated requests over nine months, the state does not know the whereabouts of at least 33,296 sex offenders, or 44 percent of the 76,350 who registered with the state at least once. These rapists and child molesters vanished after registering.


The total number of convicted sex offenders whose whereabouts are unknown may be even higher: No one knows how many offenders never registered at all after leaving prison.


Failing to register could put high-risk offenders in jail for up to three more years, but most police departments are not enforcing the law.


No one knows how many of these missing sex offenders have struck again. But nationally, 52 percent of rapists are arrested for new crimes within three years of leaving prison, according to the U.S. Justice Department (news - web sites).


Among those missing is Richard Flick, convicted of molesting four young children in the 1980s and '90s. Flick was freed from Atascadero State Hospital in 1999 despite warnings from the hospital staff that he hadn't resolved his sexual attraction to children. Even he said it would be "disastrous" to be released without supervision. A search of the database turned up nothing about him.


The 1996 law is named for 7-year-old Megan Kanka, a New Jersey girl who was raped and killed by a child molester who had moved in across the street. All states have similar laws designed to warn communities about the presence of such ex-cons.


Megan's Law databases are supposed to help the public and police monitor convicted sex offenders by keeping track of their home and work addresses and other personal details. Adults can search the database at sheriffs' offices or police departments.


But no one audits California's database for accuracy. State Justice Department officials cannot even say how much the program costs.


Attorney General Bill Lockyer touts the sex offender database as a valuable tool for the public, one that is updated daily and available in 13 languages. But when presented with the AP's findings — the first-ever analysis of the database's accuracy — he acknowledged changes are needed.


"Our system is inadequate, woefully inadequate," he said. "It can only be improved by putting money into the local law enforcement agencies. It's a matter of resources."


Former state Assemblywoman Barbara Alby, the child advocate who wrote California's Megan's Law, said she was appalled by the findings.


"We've got to put some teeth in the law for law enforcement," she said. "We should tie some of their funding to making sure this is getting done."


Some states take a firmer approach. In Washington, law enforcement officers go to sex offenders each year to confirm their information, rather than relying on ex-cons to report in. Only 10 percent of that state's 17,105 offenders could not be found, said Toni Korneder, Washington's Criminal History Records Manager.

Among the bright spots in California are Los Angeles and San Jose, which spends $600,000 on a staff of seven people working full-time to monitor 2,700 rapists and child molesters. In San Jose at least, police say they can instantly identify every known molester living or working nearby as soon as they learn of an attack on a child.

Most other local efforts are less organized and understaffed.

"We could definitely use some help," said Detective Terry Chew, the lone officer responsible for tracking Sacramento's 1,945 registered sex offenders.

He said he thinks 300 or more are not complying, but "there's so many of them out there, it's hard to keep track."


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030108/ap_on_re_us/megan_s_law_missing_2

[gopsdragon]

Firearm `fingerprinting' impractical, studies conclude - Reports undermine gun control efforts to establish nationwide ballistics database - Two related California studies to be released this week conclude it is currently impractical to catalog the ballistic ``fingerprints'' of every firearm in the state.

Recording every firearm made and sold in the nation's most populous state could be overwhelming, according to an internal California Department of Justice report obtained last fall by the Associated Press.

Supporters of a proposed nationwide database fear the report, combined with an independent review of it, will further undermine congressional support for a national firearms database inspired by last fall's Washington area sniper attacks. The reports, along with a federal rebuttal, are to be submitted to state lawmakers.

Gun control supporters want the state to lead the way by passing legislation requiring manufacturers to provide a bullet ``fingerprint'' for every gun made and sold in California, which sells and produces more guns than any other state. Currently, Maryland and New York require ballistics be kept only on handguns.

California's initial study found the number of potential computer matches in the state ``will be so large as to be impractical,'' that ``a large proportion'' of weapons couldn't be recorded, and that each gun's markings change with routine use and can be easily altered.

State Attorney General Bill Lockyer delayed the release of the state report while he submitted it for reviews by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and by independent ballistics expert Jan De Kinder of Belgium.

The ATF disputed much of the California report, saying that with systems being developed by the ATF and FBI, ``large-scale ballistic comparison goes from an impossibility to a valuable investigative tool.''

De Kinder, of Belgium's National Institute for Forensic Science, supported the state study and disputed the ATF's rebuttal.

Such databases hold promise, De Kinder concluded, but not without improvements in the current technology. The system tested was ineffective in a third to two-thirds of test firings, and ``the situation worsens as the number of firearms in the database is increased,'' he found.

His review will be included as an appendix in a report Lockyer will send to state lawmakers, said spokeswoman Hallye Jordan.

Lockyer is expected to conclude that a statewide database for large-scale ballistics comparisons is not currently practical and to recommend more research and development.

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said the studies illustrate that ``this needs a lot more study or a lot of money will be wasted.''

Gun control advocates said De Kinder's report shows such databases hold promise even if they're not ready yet.

Ballistics comparisons are widely used to match bullets to specific firearms, or to link bullets found at different crime scenes to the same weapon. Long before they had suspects in custody last fall in the Washington-area sniper attacks, investigators used such comparisons to conclude that bullets recovered in separate shootings came from a single rifle.

By Don Thompson
Associated Press
Originally Posted on Mon, Jan. 27, 2003
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/5040213.htm

[gopsdragon]

This story is meant to show how California isn't getting all the money it is supposed to. What it really shows is that people are already avoiding the tremendous tax burden in the state. The behavior will only get worse if the tax burden is increased.

Dan Walters (Sacramento Bee): Why not look first at closing billions of dollars in tax loopholes? (02-04-03) - Let's say your family finances have been doing well enough lately that you can indulge your long-held desire to acquire a boat for family outings on a nearby lake or river, and you choose an 18-foot, $18,000 runabout at your local boat dealer. When the salesman writes up the paperwork, he adds about $1,400 in sales taxes.

That's the way in which boats and other taxable goods -- cars, clothing, electronic gadgets, etc. -- are normally treated, and if Gov. Gray Davis has his way, the bite will get a little sharper. He wants to add a penny to the state and local sales tax that now runs about 8 percent in California, using the $4.5 billion a year in new income to relieve the state's immense budget crisis. Those pennies do add up.

If, however, your family finances were doing really well and you decided to spend a half-million dollars on a 50-foot yacht, the tax system works a bit differently. Thanks to a quirk in state law, you could easily avoid paying any sales tax -- not a single penny -- on your new aquatic toy.

It works this way: You and the yacht broker take a little ocean voyage, outside California's jurisdictional boundary, and there, while bobbing in the waves, you complete the transaction. You then cruise south to Ensenada, Mexico, in Baja California and park the yacht in a marina. You leave it in Ensenada for a minimum of 90 days, driving down two or three times for a weekend aboard, and after the 90-day period you cruise back to California. The yacht purchase is thereby deemed a tax-free transaction, saving you around $40,000. And it's such a common practice among Southern California yacht buyers that one firm specializes in setting up the offshore transactions and one whole section of Ensenada's harbor is set aside for Californians' luxury yachts in tax quarantine.

It's not the only California tax loophole, certainly, and perhaps not even the most egregious. But it illustrates how over the years, through legislation and regulation, California's politicians have punched huge holes in the tax system that favor those with wealth and/or political clout while ordinary Californians get socked.

Not all loopholes -- or "tax expenditures" in official parlance -- are reserved for the wealthy and powerful. Some apply broadly, such as the tax and interest deductions for homeowners, or the exclusion of food and drugs from the sales tax. But their existence raises this question: Shouldn't politicians be closing the less-defensible loopholes before they raise sales, income and car taxes?

The state Department of Finance, in its most recent report on tax expenditures, estimates that all the loopholes cost the treasury more than $23 billion a year in lost revenue. That's nearly twice as much as the state's structural gap between income and outgo. Or to put it another way, if all the loopholes, including those with broad benefits, were to be closed, the budget deficit would disappear.

Some of them, like the sales tax exemption for yachts delivered offshore, are real doozies. And not a year goes by without someone trying to punch new holes in the tax codes. Indeed, Davis specifically wants to retain one of the most expensive, a $400 million-plus-per-year income tax credit for manufacturing investment, despite the deficit, even though state officials say the credit hasn't met minimum job-creation goals.

Virtually all of those affecting business, including the manufacturers' tax break, are based on the assertion that they will create or retain jobs -- but there's precious little effort made to determine whether, in fact, the cost in lost revenue is worth it.

One example is a sales tax loophole that the Silicon Valley-centered custom software industry obtained, thanks to the efforts of John Vasconcellos, a state senator who represents the region. It exempts custom software programs, some of them costing millions of dollars, from sales taxes while ordinary computer users must pay sales taxes on non-custom programs. The loss to the state treasury is estimated at more than $170 million a year -- all the more ironic since Vasconcellos is one of those politicians who bemoan reducing services to the poor due to the state's budget crisis. What would $170 million more buy?

It brings to mind two adages: "Do as we say, not as we do" and "Follow the money."


http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/6058828p-7015219c.html

[gopsdragon]

The special interest in California so control the state that the first thing our politicians do when they want to raise taxes is tell the citizens of the state that they will cut public safety programs if a new tax is not passed.

I'm sick of it.

In 1978, Democrats threatened to close police and fire stations if the voters dared to pass Proposition 13, an intiative that limited property taxes.

In 1993, Democrats threatened to lay off police officers, firemen, and district attorneys if Californians did not pass Proposition 172, a half cent sales tax measure.

Now, in 2003, Democrats led by Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson are leading the charge to fire police, sheriffs, and district attorney's if a tripling of California's car tax is not imposed.

California's budget spending has increased 35% since 1998 with the bulk of that money going to welfare programs and tens of thousands of new state employees the governor has allowed to be hired.

California's Democrats never miss an opportunity to blackmail California's taxpayers. What is important to them is implementing an ever growing socialist state. Public safety be damned. Well, damn them and their social engineering. Cut the BILLIONS of dollars you've been spending on welfare programs.

In 1998, California's budget was roughly $58 billion without federal matching funds. Now the budget is roughly over $100 billion with matching funds. That leaves $30+ billion growth in state spending on welfare programs and state employees.

When are the people of this state going to pull their heads our of their ass and see through this tired and pathetic ploy? (None of you answer. Deep down I think we all know the answer, and I don't want to hear it.)


Davis' veto of fee increase risks public safety, say law officers

Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer Tuesday, February 4, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ratcheting up pressure on Gov. Gray Davis, Bay Area sheriffs and police chiefs warned Monday that public safety would be jeopardized if the governor vetoed a bill to increase vehicle license fees.

Standing inside the shuttered Glenn Dyer Detention Facility in Oakland, Alameda County Sheriff Charles Plummer said officers would be laid off, jail facilities could close, and crimes would not be properly investigated without the increase.

The bill -- approved Monday by the state Senate and the Assembly last week - - now awaits a decision by Davis, who opposes the vehicle license fee increase but has stopped short of saying he will veto it.

Several Bay Area police agencies have already laid off officers as a result of the state's funding gap.

"I'm frankly at the end of my rope," Plummer said at a news conference, flanked by local police chiefs and sheriffs. "I have nothing else to cut. I beg the governor not to veto it."

The license fee money is sent to local governments to pay for police and fire protection. When fees were lowered in 1998, the state began subsidizing the $4 billion difference. But Davis, struggling to bridge a $35 billion budget gap, has proposed ending that subsidy.

Under the measure, the vehicle license fee would increase by $109 a year for the average car owner.

Plummer said he wanted Davis to be remembered as a good governor, not as a "funeral director."

The sheriff also attacked Davis' finance director, Steve Peace, who has recommended that the governor veto the bill on the grounds that it does not help the state's budget problem. "It's the crack cocaine of local government," Peace said.

In response to the comment, Plummer called Peace a "slug" and described state lawmakers who don't understand the plight of law enforcement as "empty suits" living in a "twilight zone."

Plummer said he was forced last year to close the detention facility -- formerly called the North County Jail -- to bridge a $8.6 million deficit caused in part by the reduction in vehicle license fees. All the prisoners have been moved to Santa Rita Jail in Dublin, but there is ample room there, said Undersheriff Curtis Watson.

Plummer was joined by several police chiefs, including those from Alameda, Berkeley, Livermore, Oakland and Hayward, as well as sheriffs from Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties.

Also in attendance was Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff, who said the county stood to lose $95 million if the bill was not passed.

"You're looking at crippling the criminal justice system," Orloff said.

As many as 17,000 of the 54,000 police officers around the state could lose their jobs without the vehicle license fee increases, a figure that doesn't include deputy sheriffs, said Livermore Police Chief Steve Krull.

The law-enforcement officials stressed that this was a not a new tax but rather something that state legislators had promised would be reinstated.

Before 1998, the vehicle license fee was 2 percent of a vehicle's value, with the money going to local governments. It was decreased to 0.65 percent of a car's value, but the state uses a general-fund subsidy to offset the loss to cities and counties.

The bill approved Monday would give the governor's finance director authority to automatically increase vehicle license fees to the 2 percent level when the state falls on hard times.

E-mail Henry K. Lee at hlee@sfchronicle.com.


http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/04/BA60472.DTL

[Ty]

Cut the BILLIONS of dollars you've been spending on welfare programs.

But they already have the majority of those votes in the bag. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. What they need now are the more well off voters on their side.

[gopsdragon]

Again, if taxation doesn't affect people's behavior, why are these chains worried about people buying on the internet to avoid taxes?

Some Stores Collecting Online Sales Taxes
Fri Feb 7, 8:37 PM ET Add Technology - AP to My Yahoo!


By ANNE D'INNOCENZIO, AP Business Writer

NEW YORK - Some major retailers this week began voluntarily charging online sales taxes in 37 states and the District of Columbia, a move that could reshape the way business is done on the Web.

Participating brick-and-mortar retailers, such as Wal-Mart, Toys "R" Us and Target, hope their first steps will help bolster the states' effort to mandate online sales taxes, leveling the playing field between themselves and Internet-only rivals.

Under current laws, catalog companies and pure online retailers only have to charge sales taxes in states where they have operations, such as a warehouse or distribution facility. Nationwide brick-and-mortar retailers say this puts them at a disadvantage in states where catalog and Internet-only companies do not have operations.

"We can't have a system that discriminates some vendors in favor of others," said Frank Shafroth, director of state-federal relations for the National Governors Association. "Why should there be a double standard?"

The major retailers said the move also helps them integrate their online and brick-and-mortar operations.

The states, meanwhile, are eager to plug their budget shortfalls with help from Internet sales taxes. Last year, Internet sales ballooned to $79 billion, or about 3 percent of all retail sales, according to Forrester Research.

John Coalson of the Atlanta firm Alston & Bird, who represented the merchants, said he expects five more states to join in the 37-state program begun this week. He would not name the states.

However, representatives of 34 states and the District of Columbia met in Tampa last month to discuss taxing Internet sales. Those states are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma,Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, and Oregon do not collect sales tax.

Representatives for pure online retailers and catalog companies called the pact a non-starter.

"This is just a marketing ploy," said Lou Mastria, a spokesman at the Direct Marketing Association, which represents catalogs and pure online retailers. He believes brick-and-mortar retailers should be forced to charge taxes online in any state where they have a store.

Mastria also said that pure online players and small catalog companies do not have the resources to handle complicated state and local tax laws.

"It's unfair to burden them with the huge cost of complying with various sales taxes," Mastria said.

As part of the accord, the participating states agreed they won't collect taxes from past sales, according to Coalson.

In the past, many retailers had set up subsidiaries so they could avoid charging online sales taxes in states in which they operate stores. But as they started blending their online business with their stores to create better synergies, they created more tax liability.

"In order to allow consumers to return merchandise bought online to our stores, we need to charge sales tax," said Susan McLaughlin, a company spokeswoman at Toys "R" Us.

Target Corp. spokeswoman Kathy Wright said Target.com has been charging sales tax in the 47 states that it operates stores, but this week started collecting tax on online sales at Target's Web store on Amazon.com and on its Marshall Field's division's online site.

While Shafroth said the latest development "won't be a big plug" to states' financial shortfalls, if the agreement became national, it would have a dramatic effect.

He estimates that next year, there will be $35 billion of state and local revenues from uncollected taxes on e-commerce. That will jump to $50 billion in 2008, he said.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030208/ap_on_hi_te/online_sales_tax_8

[Band Camp Productions]

My prediction: If sales taxes get applied on the internet, people in the states without sales tax will start relay companies that simply act as a place to ship your stuff to, and then send it to you.

[gopsdragon]

Now the financing on the debt will go up increasing our deficit. Bet the policitians really hate this. They'll now tell us we really need the tax increase - it is vital.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moody's lowers California's credit rating

Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief Tuesday, February 11, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Sacramento -- Saying California faces a "daunting" fiscal crisis, Moody's Investors Service lowered the state's creditworthiness Monday to one of the lowest rankings in the country.

The move will probably force California to pay higher interest on its long- term debt, such as school construction, housing and water bonds.

With Monday's action by the New York rating agency, all three of the nation's bond rating firms have downgraded California within the past two months.

Although different rating firms use different yardsticks, under Moody's system the only states with a credit rating as bad as California are New York and Louisiana.

The reason cited by each agency is the state's projected $34.6 billion gap between cash coming in and spending commitments.

"These rating actions reflect the magnitude of the imbalance between the state's revenues and expenditures and the expectation the state will not be able to sufficiently address the imbalance in the upcoming fiscal year," Moody's wrote in its downgrade.

Gov. Gray Davis downplayed the announcement, saying through a spokeswoman it was not unexpected.

"This is the one agency that had not taken any action to downgrade our rating thus far," said Hilary McLean, a Davis spokeswoman.

"We'd always rather see the trend go the other way, but we still think California can offer investors a great opportunity," McLean said.

Assembly GOP leader Dave Cox of Fair Oaks, a sharp critic of Davis' budget plan, said the downgrade shows that "California will face grave consequences without timely action to bring state spending into line."

Moody's downgraded California twice in 2001 but did nothing in 2002.

Standard & Poor's and Fitch, the other two rating agencies, both dropped California's credit rating last fall.


TIED WITH LOUISIANA
Under Standard & Poor's, California is tied with Louisiana for the dubious honor of lowest credit rating.

The lower ratings will probably increase the costs of future California bond sales including $900 million in school and college campus construction bonds to be sold on Thursday.

"Although it's not the sole factor in determining the price of a bond, generally the lower your rating the higher your borrowing costs are going to be," said Ray Murphy, California bond coordinator for Moody's.

State Controller Steve Westly said last week a downgrade would worsen the state's budget hole by "tens of millions of dollars" in higher borrowing costs.


FISCAL CONDITION STABLE
Murphy said that while Moody's lowered the bond ratings, it upgraded the state's fiscal condition from "negative" to "stable."

That means another downgrade is not expected, Murphy said.

Moody's analysis said there is strong opposition to parts of Davis' budget plan from various groups, making the plan's approval difficult.

Republicans don't like the $8.3 billion in tax increases the Democratic governor proposes.

Democrats don't like the deep cuts in health and social programs.

"Given the magnitude of the budget problem, the obstacles to crafting a solution that solves the problem by the end of the 2004 fiscal year are daunting," the credit report dryly notes.

Moody's also predicts the state will not have enough money to pay off all $12.5 billion in short-term notes it took out this year to help smooth out monthly cash flow ruts.


SHORTFALL EXPECTED
Instead, Moody's expects the state to fall at least $3 billion short of paying off the notes, requiring California to take out a bigger loan in June to retire the notes and cover expenses during the first part of the next fiscal year.

Moody's also expects a budget will not be enacted by July 1, the beginning of the new fiscal year, requiring an even bigger short term note.

But Murphy said the more lawmakers cut this year, the less the state will have to borrow in June.

"The amount of the notes that the state would not be able to retire at end of year will be driven in part by how successful they are in making expenditure reductions this year," Murphy said.


http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/11/BA66393.DTL

[Eagle3]

Originally posted by gopsdragon
.....
TIED WITH LOUISIANA
Under Standard & Poor's, California is tied with Louisiana for the dubious honor of lowest credit rating. [/url]

Now all y'all need are sum Cajuns! :hehe:

[JBMoney]

[b]State senator advocates diaper recycling tariff: Diaper tax proposed to finance recycling (Lynda Gledhill, SF Chronicle) - Giving new meaning to the term "nanny state," an East Bay senator wants to impose a quarter-cent recycling fee on disposable diapers.

The fee, imposed on both child and adult diapers, would be used for local communities to set up diaper recycling programs throughout the state.

Sen. Don Perata, D-Oakland, said diapers are one of the most pervasive problems in the state's landfills.

"We know people are going to continue to use them, but this is another step toward having a good ecology," said Perata, who recently became a grandfather.

The tax would cost between $15 and $20 during the child's diaper-wearing lifetime.

"Californians have historically made environmental causes a priority," said Mark Murray, executive director of Californians Against Waste. "A quarter of a penny is a small price to pay for implementing a much-needed recycling program and protecting and conserving our state's natural resources."

But shoppers buying diapers at the South of Market Costco said they are tired of being nickel and dimed every time they turn around.

"If I hear I'm going to be taxed any more I'm going to go nutty," said Angela Dugan, who is expecting a baby on March 14. "You cannot not buy diapers. "

Dugan's husband, Anders Rosenquist, said he wouldn't mind paying the extra charge if he really knew it would be going to help the environment.

Perata said he has received positive feedback from people who want to do their share.

"Earth is getting more and more congested with refuse," he said. "I get the sense that people want to do their part."

Perata believes the tax makes sense because it is aimed at users, not all consumers. He said the goal is not to get people to stop using disposable diapers, but to allow recycling programs to be set up.

But Jannette La Fors of San Francisco said she wonders if the tax would hurt the poor.

"We have a tax on gas but you don't have to drive. But you do have to put a diaper on a baby," she said.

Republican Sen. Tom McClintock of Thousand Oaks (Ventura County) said people already pay garbage fees.

"This is adding a tax for the sake of a tax," he said. "It proves what I've been saying all along, that the Democrats want to tax the poop out of us."

A spokesman for Kimberly-Clark, which makes Huggies and Depends, said the company had not seen the bill yet, but said in general it supports disposal alternatives.

"What we don't support is funding mechanisms that unfairly singles out a single product," said Dave Dickson, a spokesman for the company. "Anything that enters the solid waste stream should be taxed."

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, diapers can take up to 500 years to decompose. More than 20 billion diapers, about 3.3 tons were sent to landfills in 2000.

Perata said diapers are one of the reasons the state is failing to meet a goal of recycling 50 percent of garbage. And he believes the problem will just get worse, saying that by 2015 adult diapers will exceed child diapers.

A pilot program setting up a local diaper recycling program in Santa Clarita in Los Angeles county has been successful, Perata said.

But Dickson said more reviews of the costs and benefits of the pilot program should be undertaken before implementing a statewide system.




http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/02/14/BA76016.DTL

[JBMoney]

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/5180372.htm

Fri, Feb. 14, 2003

State OKs 211 hotline for referrals
By Karen de Sá
Mercury News

The number 211 will be available within the next year for Californians to use in the event of a social needs crisis.

The state's Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously Thursday to regulate the 211 referral line, which like 911 will serve as a 24-hour number. The 211 telephone service will offer assistance on a range of issues from homelessness, placing relatives in hospice care and locating the nearest food bank or county shelter to finding runaway teens and getting help with spousal abuse.

``This gets to some very serious problems in society,'' said Michael Peevey, president of the PUC, before voting Thursday. ``The more people are connected to a social service they need -- and the sooner people are connected -- the better.''

With the PUC's approval, counties can now proceed with local planning efforts to consolidate existing information and referral lines and gather funding. The 211 service will be free to callers not using cell phones or pay phones, but cities, counties and non-profit groups will have to foot the bill.

Organizing services

Santa Clara County supervisors will consider partially funding the $1.7 million cost in next year's budget. That allows organizers from the United Way time to gather additional sponsors and consolidate what is currently a confusing array of referral services offered by hundreds of different agencies.

Some Bay Area counties are further along with centralized referral services. Alameda, for example, could with PUC approval launch 211 phone service within a year. The goal is to have 211 service in every county in the state.

In July 2000, the Federal Communications Commission set aside 211 as a nationwide referral number for health and human services information, launching initiatives across the country. When the national campaign is complete, 211 could be dialed in any part of the country for immediate help and referrals.

So far, 20 states have made 211 service available.

Saving money

Nona Tobin, community-building projects manager for United Way, has the difficult job of raising money for the Santa Clara County 211 initiative, at a time when social service spending is being scaled back dramatically. To make the case, Tobin will use reports from existing agencies showing how much money and staff time is wasted by misdirected and duplicate calls.

What's more, with myriad numbers to call, people in need get frustrated -- or worse, they never get connected to help. A recent University of Nebraska study showed that callers seeking social services typically try seven or eight numbers before they either get help or give up.

``Budget constraints make it all the more important that there be a 211 system,'' said Sharon DeCray, former president of the California Alliance of Information and Referral Services. ``A system like this will mean someone can call a single number and be referred to an organization that continues to provide the services that they need.''

[Laurie]

I think it's a splendid idea. Keep those non-emergency calls from flooding the actual emergent calls.


I cannot believe what some people will dial 911 for. :nuts:

[gopsdragon]

Originally posted by JBMoney
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/5180372.htm

Fri, Feb. 14, 2003

State OKs 211 hotline for referrals
By Karen de Sá
Mercury News
The state's Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously Thursday to regulate the 211 referral line, which like 911 will serve as a 24-hour number. The 211 telephone service will offer assistance on a range of issues from homelessness, placing relatives in hospice care and locating the nearest food bank or county shelter to finding runaway teens and getting help with spousal abuse.


What a bunch of crap! This is typical liberalism. The same people who are going to pick up the phone to call 211 are the same people who can pick up the phone to call hospice care themselves without some bloated statewide network eating up yet more tax dollars.

What is the homeless call going to accomplish? For those moving out of their homes they can get directions to the nearest homeless shelter?

Runaway teens? The same people who don't want their parents to know where they are (which is why they ran away from home) are going to pick up the phone and ask for the nearest government sponsored runaway center so the authorities can get in contact with the parents?

All of these things can be taken care of without the help of a 211 line. This is simply another unnecessary expense. :mad:

[JasmineDreamz]

Oh shit!! That's one place I don't want to work. Oh Pete......found a new job for you.:idea:

[shotglass]

The joke goes like this:

Man reading paper in California: "Taxes are going up in this state again? What am I supposed to do, start shitting money?"

Wife: "No, dear. Gov. Davis has made that the babies job now."

[evereno]

While this may be Members of the Nevada Legislature poking fun at their Governor who seeks to raise taxes, it is more telling just how oppressive California taxation is.

Lawmaker's ploy: Rename Nevada to East California

ASSOCIATED PRESS

February 18, 2003


CARSON CITY, Nev. – An anonymous legislator has asked for a bill to change Nevada's name to East California and change the state song to "The Tax Man" – teasing Gov. Kenny Guinn about his $1 billion tax proposal.

The name change was on a list of bill draft requests from individual lawmakers. While many proposals name the legislator who requested the draft, it's not required, and there was no name on the "East California" request.

Guinn did not seem amused.

Greg Bortolin, the Republican governor's press secretary, said, "In these economic hard times, it's tragic that we're wasting money on things like this.

"Further, it's cowardice for someone not to come forward and take credit for this," Bortolin said. "And if it's coming from some of the governor's critics, it's ironic that they'd be wasting money like this."

The Republican governor's tax plan is aimed at filling a $700 million-plus revenue shortfall and providing some new funds to allow some program improvements to deal with demands created by population growth.

But critics of the plan have pressed for explanations of the governor's revenue projections from the new taxes, and say he hasn't proved his claims about the deficit. They contend that the tax-increase plan actually could create a huge surplus.

New business taxes form the core of the governor's record tax-hike proposal.

The plan also calls for a reduction in the property taxes that now go mainly to local governments, increases in cigarette and liquor taxes, and a new entertainment tax on concerts and movies. Also proposed are increases in fees charged by the Secretary of State's Office.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/tue/news/news_1n18taxman.html

[gopsdragon]

I normally don't post things like this, but it was too good to pass up. Following is the news transcripts that goes out telling what will be on the afternoon satellite feeds. My favorite quote is at the bottom.

Who knew you couldn't legislate asthma prevention?

http://bushwhacked.net/forum/images/smilies/logout.gif

CTNS SCRIPTS
CAPITOL TELEVISION NEWS SERVICE
SACRAMENTO, CA
(916) 446-7890
WEDNESDAY 19 FEBRUARY 2003


1. LAO/BUDGET ANALYSIS VO/SOT
2. ASTHMA EPIDEMIC/CHILDREN VO/SOT
3. DISABILITY SYSTEM PROBE VO
4. MEGAN'S LAW HEARING VO/SOT
5. FREE E-FILE SERVICE VO/SOT

...

2. ASTHMA EPIDEMIC/CHILDREN VO/SOT

LIVE: THE NUMBER OF CALIFORNIA CHILDREN WITH ASTHMA HAS ALMOST DOUBLED IN THE LAST TWENTY YEARS. TODAY STATE LAWMAKERS EXAMINED THE REASONS BEHIND CLIMBING ASTHMA CASES.


SUPER: TODAY/STATE CAPITOL
SUPER: FILE AIR POLLUTION

VO: (0:15)
ENVIRONMENTALISTS BELIEVE THAT TOXINS IN THE AIR CAN TRIGGER ASTHMA FOR CHILDREN. LAWMAKERS SAY FIVE CALIFORNIA CITIES...LOS ANGELES...RIVERSIDE...BAKERSFIELD...FRESNO AND VISALIA...ARE AMONG THE CITIES WITH THE WORST AIR QUALITY IN THE NATION.


SUPER: ASSMB. DARIO FROMMER/(D)-GLENDALE

SOT: IN: "WHAT ALARMS ME..."
OUT: "...DONE NOTHING." (0:10)
SAYS: "WHAT ALARMS ME IS DESPITE THE FACT CALIFORNIA HAS MORE LAWS THAN ANY OTHER STATE TO PROTECT KIDS AND CONTROL ASTHMA, RATES ARE CLIMBING AT THE SAME RATES AS STATES THAT HAVE DONE NOTHING."


VO TAG: (0:25)
STATE LAWMAKERS ARE ALSO CONCERNED THAT THE PROBLEM MAY BE WORSENED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS PLANS TO RELAX AIR QUALITY LAWS.

EXTRA BITE: (1)


"WHAT ALARMS ME IS DESPITE THE FACT CALIFORNIA HAS MORE LAWS THAN ANY OTHER STATE TO PROTECT KIDS AND CONTROL ASTHMA, RATES ARE CLIMBING AT THE SAME RATES AS STATES THAT HAVE DONE NOTHING." -Assemblyman Dario Frommer

No S*** Sherlock. Did you really think asthma cared about your legislation?

Furthermore, we are supposed to believe his legislation doesn't help prevent asthma, but George Bush's legislation will cause it.


http://bushwhacked.net/forum/images/smilies/stoopid.gif

[evereno]

Scuffle Breaks Out At City Council Meeting
Three Council Members, Mayor Arrested Monday
UPDATED: 7:38 a.m. PST March 5, 2003



LOS ANGELES -- A Compton City Council meeting got out of control after opponents and supporters of three indicted council members began shoving and shouting at one another.

No injuries were reported. Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies, who were called to monitor the meeting, said no arrests were made.

The three council members, along with former Mayor Omar Bradley and current City Manager John Johnson, were arrested Monday for investigation of felony embezzlement, authorities said.

Authorities declined to discuss the charges but said all five men were released on bail Monday night. They were ordered to appear at a Superior Court hearing on March 24.

Tuesday's outburst came near the end of the council meeting. After current Mayor Eric Perrodin called for public comment, a surge of people lined up to speak. Sheriff's deputies said two people -- one a supporter of indicted Councilwoman Delores Zurita and the other a union representative and friend of Perrodin -- began to push one another.

The mayor's friend, Eric Kizziee, said the shoving match began after the other man, who was not identified, called him derogatory names.

Others joined the brief scuffle, pushing and yelling. Sheriff's deputies moved them outside, where the shoving and name-calling continued.

"This is how they operate, by intimidation," Perrodin said afterward. "It's unfortunate that it ended that way, but maybe more people need to see this to wake up and see all the corruption and thuggery. And maybe the people of Compton will be less apathetic."

Supporters of the five indicted officials blamed Perrodin for the disruption.

"It was obviously orchestrated by Mr. Perrodin, and I think it's actually kind of embarrassing," said Anthony Willoughby, Zurita's attorney.

The other two indicted council members are Amen Rahh and Yvonne Arceneaux.

Monday's arrests are the latest in a string of troubles for the city of more than 90,000 residents just south of Los Angeles. Compton has been wracked by gang violence, political infighting and troubled schools.

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2020365/detail.html

[gopsdragon]

California claims it wants cleaner air for various reasons (see "Asthma" post above) but now plans on charging solar power users extra money because by not buying power off of the state grid they are not charged the extra fee levies to reimburse the state for its disasterous $43 billion energy contract fiasco during the power crisis. So now the state is simply going to fine solar users directly to make up the difference.

Solar advocates take dim view of new fees
AGENCY WANTS TO TAX HOMES THAT GENERATE OWN POWER
By John Woolfolk
Mercury News

Californians who recently took the trouble to put up solar electric panels expected hearty thanks from a state desperate for clean energy to relieve its strained power grid.

Instead, they may be getting a bill.

A California Public Utilities Commission proposal would slap a charge on consumers who start generating their own power. The reason: to cover the high costs of electricity the state bought for utility customers during the energy crisis two years ago.

Though aimed at big businesses that fire up their own generators to escape high utility rates, the proposal also affects those who turn to solar power.

Alternative power advocates say the extra charge will dampen interest in solar systems and will undercut California's longstanding goal of pushing alternatives to fossil fuels.

``California is a leader in renewable technology, and now it's the first state to install a solar tax,'' said Doug Linney, president of the Next Generation, a solar trade group in Oakland. ``If you're part of the energy solution, you're going to get dinged.''

The proposal stems from worries that, if customers of the state's utilities rush to install their own power systems, other ratepayers would be stuck with the bill for the multibillion-dollar bonds and long-term power contracts left over from the energy crisis two years ago.

``Costs have been incurred which now are inescapable,'' said Commissioner Carl Wood. ``To the extent some customers leave the system, customers left behind have to pay for it.''

Customers of Pacific Gas & Electric and the state's two other major corporate utilities who installed solar systems on or after Jan. 17, 2001, would be on the hook.

How much they would pay has yet to be decided.

But under one proposal, a PG&E customer would pay a surcharge on the power used from new solar panels. The charge would range from a half a cent to 2.7 cents per kilowatt-hour. For an average monthly household use of 500 kilowatt-hours, that would add anywhere from $2.50 to $13.50 to the bill.

Start-up costs

Jacquelyn Hall, who spent $40,000 putting solar panels on her son's San Jose home last year, said she might not have done it if she knew about the proposed charge. Her system was designed to produce just enough power to cancel out the bill each year.

``There can't be a break-even point if they're taxing you,'' Hall said. ``It's such an expensive venture to begin with, I probably wouldn't have done it.''

Eric Jorgensen, a solar installer whose San Jose home has been powered by the sun since 1999, said his customers already must overcome high purchase costs, utility hookup hassles and a discouraging scheme in which they are not paid for power they put back on the grid.

``You're spending a lot of money and giving more benefits than taking away,'' Jorgensen said, explaining that he believes the utilities benefit. ``You're doing them a favor.''

It's unlikely that most solar power customers would pay more than the minimum charge, which is half a cent per kilowatt-hour.

Under the proposal, 1,800 of PG&E's 2,000 current solar customers who now pump surplus solar power back into the grid would have to pay just the minimum charge.

And the proposal allows some 200 megawatts of new renewable projects to be added each year with those customers also paying just the minimum.

That could cover most of the new solar systems built each year. All the solar systems installed by PG&E customers last year totaled just 7.5 megawatts.

Critics say any charge, however small, would deter needed investment in solar. In light of such criticism, commissioners have offered two alternatives that would fully exempt most or all solar customers and postponed a vote on the matter until their March 13 meeting.

``Solar people will probably get a break,'' said Commissioner Geoffrey Brown. ``The degree of the break -- whether it's a total or partial exemption -- is the question. I just smell political blow-back to the point where it appears they're going to be OK.''

Brown conceded there are so few solar customers that the amount they would generate in fees would hardly be missed. ``It may not be worth pursuing,'' he said.

The surcharge is rooted in concern over how to repay the state for buying overpriced electricity on behalf of utility customers at the height of the energy crisis in 2001, when companies like PG&E could not keep up with soaring market prices.

The state in November sold a record $11.3 billion in bonds to cover the costs of electricity bought for utility customers in 2001. The state also has signed some $40 billion worth of long-term contracts to supply those customers with power over the next eight years.

While wholesale power prices have subsided, utility customers are still paying inflated rates to cover the bonds and contracts.

State regulators already have been trying to figure out how to deal with customers who leave the utilities for cheaper power suppliers. An earlier decision held that customers choosing ``direct access'' to a cheaper energy supplier should pay up to 2.7 cents per kilowatt-hour that they use.

Opposition groups

Consumer groups are leery of allowing exemptions even for solar power. They say the state already does plenty to promote it through rebates of up to half the purchase cost and tax write-offs, and they fear an exemption from the charge could leave regular consumers paying more.

``I'd love to have solar, but I can't afford it,'' said Mindy Spatt of The Utility Reform Network. ``I can't pay for somebody else's.''

TURN's Matt Freedman said the group supports exempting solar systems from the long-term contract costs -- which account for the highest charges. But he said the half-cent per kilowatt-hour charge to cover the bonds may be inescapable under state law.

But Rose Jacobs Gibson, president of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, said, ``Taxing green power in the name of equity is entirely shortsighted.''

San Mateo County recently installed solar panels on its crime lab that generate 270,000 kilowatts a year. The proposed charge could cost an extra $5,400 to $41,700 a year, she said.

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 332, which spent $500,000 to solar power their San Jose headquarters at the height of the energy crisis, feels betrayed.

``It's unfair,'' said board member Jay James. ``On one side of their mouth they talk about, `Hey, you need to do something to help the state out with renewable energy.' And yet when you start installing it they say, `Now we're going to charge you.' ''

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/5357000.htm

[Eagle3]

I suppose next they'll tax sunbathers for getting a tan.

Why don't you guys stick Davis in a reactor? He might give off a watt or two before burning up. :what:

[gopsdragon]

Eagle3-
Please, in the future refrain from giving California officials any more "good" ideas.

[gopsdragon]

Proposal would levy city, county income taxes
By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU

SACRAMENTO -- Californians would pay city and county income taxes -- on top of their state and federal personal income taxes -- under a controversial new bill that firefighter unions said Monday is needed to bail out East Bay fire agencies in particular.

Assemblyman Mark Leno, a San Francisco Democrat who quietly introduced the labor-sponsored measure last month, said he sees the proposal as a path through some of the political gridlock barring solutions to the state deficit.

But Republican lawmakers and taxpayer groups, upon learning of the legislation Monday, vowed to block what they called a "horrible precedent." They further challenged assertions that the bill could be passed on a vote of majority Democrats and that the tax could be approved locally on simple-majority votes.

The measure would allow voters in cities or counties to adopt local income taxes totaling up to 10 percent of their state income tax liability. Nearly a third of the new money would go to fire protection, with the rest funding other local government services.

"The bill was introduced on behalf of all local governments that are facing the fiscal crunch, but we are specifically mentioning Fremont and Oakland, primarily because they are the first two cities in the state that have actually seen front-line fire services cut," said Carroll Wills of the California Professional Firefighters.

"There has been a lot of talk about threatened cuts, a lot of talk about what could happen, but in Fremont and Oakland, it's not theoretical," Wills said.

Leno's measure is one of the boldest in a series of Democratic tax-hike proposals aimed at helping to ease the potential $35 billion deficit facing state government. But Republican lawmakers are opposed to any tax increases.

At the same time, legislators have been unable to agree on the major spending cuts needed to help close the funding gap.

Leno said he embraced the local income tax as an innovative way to bolster local government funding. He also is considering a measure that would allow cities and counties to tack on additional cigarettes taxes, although the details have yet to be worked out.

"We've got to be thinking in new and different ways, because we are just logjammed right now," he said.

According to the proposal, the local income taxes sought by cities and counties would be capped at a combined 10 percent of a taxpayer's state tax liability. In other words, if a taxpayer owed $1,000 in state taxes, then the local income tax could total no more than $100.

As much as 80 percent of the revenue could go to the city, with the remaining 20 percent allocated to the county.

Fire agencies would receive an amount of property tax revenue equal to 30 percent of the new money.

But anti-tax crusaders said they are opposed to the idea.

"It would set a horrible and dangerous precedent to have local governments levy income taxes," said Jon Coupal of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

Two major points of contention immediately emerged.

Proponents said the legislation could be passed on a majority vote by the dominant Democrats because it deals with tax policy, not directly with taxes. Foes disagree.

Supporters also said local electorates could adopt the tax on simple-majority votes because the money would be used for general purposes.

Again, opponents disagreed, citing the state constitution and signaling that if the measure is ultimately approved by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, the matter is likely to wind up in the courts.>

http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82%257E1865%257E1235824,00.html

[cuda]

Boy, California kinda sux. :what:

[Ether_Elemental]

yeah it's kinda scary being neighbors to 'em:nuts: (yay this is my 100th post!)

[Eagle3]

$35 Billion is peanuts. Why, I bet you could find that in Davis's couch. :what:

[evereno]

I am just trying to figure out why this is news. Only in the People's Republic of California.



Baja residents feel vulnerable should U.S. tighten border
By Sandra Dibble
STAFF WRITER

March 18, 2003


TIJUANA – Many people here fear that the fallout from conflict with Iraq will come hard and fast, that their lives will be interrupted once more by events outside the region and beyond their control.

The most common concern is that entering the United States will take hours, as it did at crossings all along the U.S.-Mexico border after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Even the thousands of Mexicans who have special security clearances could find themselves in long lines if the fast-track Sentri commuter lanes are closed.

U.S. officials won't say precisely how the border will be affected if the conflict escalates, but they insist it won't necessarily be shut down.

"There is no designated, automatic plan that says if there is a war that the border would close," said Lauren Mack, spokeswoman in San Diego for the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security. "Nor is there any automatic, designated plan that says if we go to red alert the border closes."

A more likely scenario, U.S. officials say, is fewer open lanes and more intense inspections.

As the clock ticks down, residents of Mexico's northern border feel increasingly vulnerable. When San Diego catches a cold, Tijuana catches pneumonia, the saying goes. While the Mexican government disagrees with the United States about attacking Iraq – and polls show Mexicans overwhelmingly oppose the U.S. government's plans – on the border, practical concerns are paramount.

"People's minds are not on Iraq, nor on the aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf," said Ernesto Ruffo, Mexico's commissioner for the northern border. "People here are thinking about work and if they're going to be able to cross."

People worry about their classes in Chula Vista, their jobs in San Diego, and the myriad chores and pleasures that draw them into the United States and lure Americans to Mexico.

"I think we'd be naive to think there wouldn't be heightened security concerns and that initially there won't be delays," warned the U.S. ambassador to Mexico, Tony Garza.

Immediately after 9-11, the wait during the morning commute was four or five hours. But it came down considerably, then rose when border security was tightened under the recent orange alert, which was reduced then reimposed yesterday.

Luz María Cuevas, a third-grade teacher in Tijuana, has been crossing the border since she was a little girl. But after the terrorist attacks, her weekly visits became monthly.

"For me, going to the United States is like going to my own home, but in these circumstances, we're afraid of what could happen," said Cuevas. Even more affected is her daughter, who takes a weekly class at San Diego State University and has a boyfriend in San Diego.

A poll last month of residents of Tijuana, Rosarito Beach and Ensenada by the newspaper Frontera showed 55 percent feel very affected by the conflict. The largest portion, 50 percent, cited economic reasons; 17.6 percent said it was the wait at the border; 7.5 percent said they felt affected because they work in the United States; 4.6 percent because they have family there.

"For now we are living in a reality that we don't like, the consequence of a decision of the U.S. government," Baja California Gov. Eugenio Elorduy said last month.

Tijuana's tourism business dropped 90 percent after 9-11, but it has slowly recovered, reaching 60 percent of its pre-attack levels early this year.

The owner of a Rosarito Beach hotel, Hugo Torres, says the current situation has affected tourism far more than the 1991 Gulf War. What changed everything, he said, is the fear of terrorism and the additional security at the border since the World Trade Center attacks.

Like other businessmen, Torres is worried, but with their economy so tied to Southern California, "the attitude we should take is to keep going," he said.

Across the Texas border, the state of Chihuahua has come up with an advertising slogan to suit these uncertain times: "Chihuahua – So Close and So Safe." Baja California plans its own slogan: "Good Times Close to Home."

"We've got to react," said Alejandro Moreno Medina, Baja California tourism secretary. "We're going to have to rethink our marketing strategies."

Moreno's office has met with transportation companies in San Diego to promote tour packages that include round-trip bus rides from the border to Tijuana, Rosarito Beach and Ensenada. The goal is to help visitors avoid the long car lines on weekends.

In hopes of expanding the tourist base, Moreno recently led a delegation to Europe to promote the state's grape-growing region, future convention center and plans to develop the coastline through the Escalera Nautica.

Fears of war have spread beyond Baja California's business sector.

Roman Catholics in Tijuana gathered recently at the city's downtown cathedral to call for peace. White candles flickered as Bishop Rafael Romo Munoz led more than 1,500 people in prayer.

"We all feel affected by this, one way or another," said Gerardo Martínez, a 19-year-old student.

Security concerns have prompted Mexican authorities to upgrade security at Tijuana's airports. Mexican health officials are on guard for a bioterrorist attack against the United States and have assigned additional resources to the border, a federal health official said.

No matter what happens, even war, people here believe the ties between San Diego and Tijuana will continue to run deep and strong.

"It's unlikely that this kind of event could suddenly sever ties," said Humberto Insunza, Tijuana's director of economic development. "Too many of us have family on both sides of the border."


http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/tue/metro/news_1m18guerra.html

[evereno]

Saddam Lookalike Prospers in California
Tue Mar 18, 8:53 AM ET

By Laura Leslie

SACRAMENTO, California (Reuters) - As the United States prepares to go to war with Iraq (news - web sites), a man who looks just like Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) proudly wanders the halls of California's state capitol.

Jaded state legislators don't even bat an eye when he appears to drop by their offices.

They know it is actually Jerry Haleva, a savvy political insider with his own lobbying firm, Sergeant Major Communications, and a thriving sideline as Hollywood's favorite double for Saddam Hussein.

If you have seen Saddam in a movie lately, you have may have seen Haleva. His screen credits include the spoofs "Hot Shots" and "Hot Shots Deux," the Coen Brothers' "The Big Lebowski," and the 2002 HBO mockumentary "Live from Baghdad."

And no, it's not just the makeup. Haleva really does bear a striking resemblance to the Iraqi leader, who is reputed to employ a number of doubles for security reasons.

"Especially when I'm in costume," Haleva said, pointing to a headshot from "Live from Baghdad." "You know all those posters and billboards in the movie? That was me as Saddam."

Haleva's film career started with a 1989 prank when he was a staffer for the legislature's Republican minority leader.

"The sergeant at arms saw this picture of Saddam addressing his troops. But he copied the picture and passed it around the Capitol with the caption: 'Now we know what Haleva does on his weekends,'" he said.

After the first Gulf War (news - web sites), the lobbyist became a hot property as his impersonator, both in movies and in person.

While waiting in costume at one convention, he met former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres (news - web sites).

"I shook his hand, and someone said 'I have got to get this picture!'" he said. Haleva used the photo in his firm's marketing brochures with the caption: "If we can make this happen, how hard can your issue be?"

Haleva said his resemblance has been good for business. "It opens doors...and I have a lot of fun with it."

The lobbyist clearly enjoys his impersonation work; he has a wall of mementos, props, and photos with Hollywood stars.

But he also relishes the irony of being a pro-Israel Jewish activist earning money by making fun of the Iraqi leader.

Haleva dismissed concerns about his personal safety.

"During the first Gulf War, I took a friend's advice and shaved off my mustache. But life's too short -- you can't live in fear,' he said. "I don't think anybody thinks I share any of Saddam's views."

Haleva said he fully supports President Bush (news - web sites)'s actions against Hussein, whom he described as "pure evil."

"As an actor," Haleva says, "I hope he goes into exile, and my career extends. But as an American, I hope I get to do his epitaph."

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=573&u=/nm/20030318/od_nm/iraq_saddam_lookalike_dc&printer=1

[gopsdragon]

Originally posted by cuda
Boy, California kinda sux. :what:

Kinda? You don't have to hold back to spare my feelings cuda. I know where I live. I remember when we were still free.

[shotglass]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/03/19/MN26098.DTL


This link goes to a story about another Democrat calling Bush a terrorist..yada yada yada, they are all doing it and can't stop themselves...

The interesting thing is this: They have put up a poll, and the question is 'Do you think this Congressman is right, wrong, or kinda right but should tone it down'?

The vote so far is 34% agree, 2% say tone it down, and an astonishing 64% say he is a disgrace and should shut up. When I tried to vote along with the majority that say he is an embarrasment, the pop-up window told me I had already voted and my vote would not count.

I smell a conspiracy....:scary:

[evereno]

What do you expect from a newspaper out of San Frncisco, fairness, truth, patirotism? No, they realized where the poll was going and did not want to embarrass the unembarrassable.


Besides, who cares what Pete Stark says, while Barbara Lee is definitely a communist, Stark is the Party leader.

[Eagle3]

Originally posted by shotglass
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/03/19/MN26098.DTL
The vote so far is 34% agree, 2% say tone it down, and an astonishing 64% say he is a disgrace and should shut up. When I tried to vote along with the majority that say he is an embarrasment, the pop-up window told me I had already voted and my vote would not count.

I smell a conspiracy....:scary:

It's up to 66% now :)
My vote got through.

[shotglass]

We call that city San FranCrisco around here.

[evereno]

Only in a state such as California.....

Transgender Official Hailed as 'Woman of the Year'
By Nancy Vogel
Times Staff Writer

March 25, 2003

SACRAMENTO -- The California Assembly on Monday honored the first transgender recipient of its "woman of the year" award.

Theresa Sparks, a member of the San Francisco Human Rights Commission, was one of 80 women chosen by their Assembly representatives for extraordinary dedication to the community.

Winners in the 17-year Assembly tradition included a college president, a minister, an environmentalist and many volunteers at libraries, hospitals, schools and parks.

Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) said he had chosen Sparks for her work as the head of the Alice B. Toklas Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Democratic Club and on the city's human rights commission.

As a San Francisco County supervisor, Leno worked with Sparks to make the city the first in the nation to insure its employees for such transgender-related health care as mastectomy, hysterectomy and psychiatric counseling.

"She has remarkable intelligence and commitment and tenacity," said Leno, one of four openly gay members of the Assembly.

Leno said Sparks' visit to the Capitol will emphasize the need for AB 196, his bill to ban discrimination against transgender people in housing and employment.

The bill passed the Assembly Labor and Employment Committee last week and now faces a vote in the full Assembly.

Like the other honorees, Sparks received a plaque and posed for photographs with Assembly Speaker Herb J. Wesson Jr. (D-Culver City).

"She was welcomed by one and all," said Leno. "I was very pleased."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-transgender25mar25,1,2785997.story?coll=la%2Dheadl ines%2Dcalifornia