Yes, You Should Be Punished

KPBS has a story about how the purported affect of a San Diego minimum wage hike on a restaurant owner and burger flipping Mom with four kids.  They try to make it sound as if their is no some kind of moral symmetry in the situations, there isn't.

Kristin Aguirre is a married mother of four daughters, all under age 8. She's 25 years old and earns minimum wage working at the Burger King in City Heights.
. . .
"I could have waited to have kids and gone on with school, but I didn't," she said. "Just because of that, we shouldn't be punished and make a low wage to raise our kids."

News flash for you Kristin, you should be punished for having not one, but four kids, with both you and your husband lacking the skills to support them. (Her husband makes $200/week, they both get assistance.)  Both of you decided to be leaches on society through your lifestyle choices and take advantage of society's compassion.  You are punishing your children as well, cramming all four of them into a single bedroom.  What's wrong with you?

Meanwhile, restaurant owner Matt Gordon is going to be hit with over half a million dollars per year in additional direct costs and untold indirect cost increases.  If his business fails, 54 employees will lose work.  Meanwhile, the immediate impact of the minimum wage rise is for Kristin's pay to go from $500 to $540 per month. Not exactly life changing.

The contrast between who we are rewarding and punishing with the left's push for a minimum wage hike couldn't be more revealing of the damage they wish to inflict on society.  Matt Gordon is clearly a successful, creative, ambitious man and pretty decent looking to boot.

The contrast with Kristin Aguirre couldn't be more striking.  Check the pictures in the article and ask yourself "Do we want more Matts or Kristins in our society?"

Hamas' War Crimes

Hamas is committing multiple war crimes.  In a more just world, Hamas leadership would suffer the same fate as convicted Nazi war criminals, to be hung by the neck until dead.  First, they are launching indiscriminate attacks aimed at civilian populations.  The rocket attacks on Israel violate International law as set forth in multiple treaties.  From the Red Cross' web site on international humanitarian law:

Rule 1. The parties to the conflict must at all times distinguish between civilians and combatants. Attacks may only be directed against combatants. Attacks must not be directed against civilians.
The principle of distinction between civilians and combatants was first set forth in the St. Petersburg Declaration, which states that “the only legitimate object which States should endeavour to accomplish during war is to weaken the military forces of the enemy”.[1]  The Hague Regulations do not as such specify that a distinction must be made between civilians and combatants, but Article 25, which prohibits “the attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings which are undefended”, is based on this principle.[2]  The principle of distinction is now codified in Articles 48, 51(2) and 52(2) of Additional Protocol I, to which no reservations have been made.[3]  According to Additional Protocol I, “attacks” means “acts of violence against the adversary, whether in offence or in defence”.[4] 

See the web site for the footnotes.

Second, Hamas delivers their rocket attacks while hiding in and amongst the civilian population.

RETWEET THIS: Hamas terrorists use houses as command centers. We target them for a reason. #ProtectiveEdge pic.twitter.com/LjiQSYwSg0
— PM of Israel (@IsraeliPM) July 12, 2014

Again, from the Red Cross (different page):

Rule 97. The use of human shields is prohibited.
In the context of international armed conflicts, this rule is set forth in the Third Geneva Convention (with respect to prisoners of war), the Fourth Geneva Convention (with respect to protected civilians) and Additional Protocol I (with respect to civilians in general).[1]  Under the Statute of the International Criminal Court, “utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts.[2] 

It's the law of the land, well the whole planet, for that matter.  But it seems unlikely that justice will be done or the law enforced with respect to Hamas.

Crumbling Institutions of the Left - Government Run Healthcare

Government run and funded healthcare is having a bad year.  The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has not delivered on its promise to insure all Americans, with 75% of those previously lacking insurance still lacking.  I also think that the situation might actually be worse, since I don't trust surveys in the social sciences.  Meanwhile, VA healthcare is no longer touted as a model of care for all.

In Virginia, Republicans have shown how principled opposition to Medicaid expansion can be popular and helpful to the state's finances.  

In January a poll by the Wason Center for Public Policy at Christopher Newport University found that 38% of Virginians opposed the Medicaid expansion. By late April, 53% were against it.

Meanhwile, Medicare is being slowly changed by the semi-free market of Medicare Advantage plans.

Austin Frakt, writing in the NYT, says that Newt Gingrich's 1995 prediction that medicare would wither on the vine if people were allowed to choose subsidized private insurance is turning out to be correct.  From the article. 

No matter the reason, what’s clear is that Medicare Advantage is a strong and growing program, despite recent moderation in government subsidies. As Medicare Advantage grows, traditional Medicare necessarily shrinks and its influence on the American health care system weakens. If the trend continues, policies, including those in the Affordable Care Act, designed to use traditional Medicare as a tool to reshape health care delivery for all Americans may become less potent. Is there a tipping point at which traditional Medicare ceases to matter?

Meanwhile, the GOP is eventually going to have to provide some positive alternatives to the ACA.  There are no shortage of good ideas, see my proposals here.  Reason's Nick Gillespie steals some of these ideas (which I stole from John Mackey).

Crumbling Institutions of the Left - Teacher's Unions

Allysia Finley does a public service by pointing out the epic math fail of the National Education Assoication (NEA, aka the teacher's union, albeit there are others).  While their pension fund goes broke, the union (and not so much the teachers themselves) are calling for Arne Duncan's resignation over testing, and debating fracking, because, well ... leftists just can't help themselves.  Some lovely highlights:

NEA membership has declined is that student enrollment nationwide has dropped, meaning fewer teachers are needed. Enrollment has ticked up mainly in fast-growing states like Texas, where teachers don't have collective-bargaining rights and right-to-work laws make paying union dues and agency fees voluntary. Wisconsin's collective-bargaining reforms and new right-to-work laws in Indiana and Michigan have prompted tens of thousands of teachers to drop out of the union or stop paying dues.

 . . .

In 2007, the NEA promised employees that it would make their insolvent pension plan 100% funded by 2021—it was 84% funded as of last year—to prevent a mandated reduction in benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and Pension Protection Act of 2006, which govern private-employer pension plans. Yet subsequent investment losses have caused pension costs to soar for the national union and its state affiliates.

Interestingly, the employees of the NEA union are also unionized and picketed the annual convention in Denver last week.  One of the AFSME beefs? The NEA passed along higher costs associated with the Affordable Care Act to the union members?  Ironic doesn't quite capture this outcome.  Even the left is being impacted by the actions of the left.  The good work done by Republicans in TX, WI and MI are helping to prevent your tax dollars from going towards the leftist agenda.  A little ray of hope in an otherwise gloomy Obama era.

What You Should Be Reading

• KPBS tosses out a bunch of softballs for Scott Peters and Carl DeMaio in the CA 52nd race. Predictably there answers don't show much difference, except where DeMaio supports border enforcement.  Also, what the hell is DeMaio doing supporting net neutrality?  Peters has the better position on this, where he asks why the heck is the FCC considering labeling broadband providers as common carriers.  Still voting for DeMaio, because we need a strong GOP majority to keep Obama's lawlessness in check.
• Eight straw donors to the 2012 Bonnie Dumanis mayoral campaign were fined a total of $60,000 by the San Diego Ethics Commission. A little more information from the Azano scandal.
• Obama's top donor in the 2012 cycle (when you total donations of employees and contributions to PACs), University of California (I am pretty sure its the whole system, not just Berkeley).

Compassion and Leftist Lies About the Children's Immigration Crusade

WSJ headline: Few Children Are Deported.  Yeah, we knew that, but good to see some investigation into the truth.  The reason I knew, those to whom that information was most valuable; parents who also want to enter the U.S. were already acting on that information, sending their kids by the hundreds of thousands to the border.  Leftists are invoking "rule of law" to say that we can't just deport them.  How about preventing their entry in the first place?  We have a right, well recognized in international law, to prevent persons from walking across our border.

The other leftist plaint is that we should be compassionate.  How is it compassionate to send kids to wander through Mexico unescorted to our border?  The dangers, both man-caused and natural, are too obvious to enumerate here.

I saw a tweet from a leftish sort of dude that said that we should accept these kids because of . . . Darwin.  Somehow these kids represent the survival of the fittest.  News flash, these are not the skills you are looking for.  The fact that their parents risk their lives and the fact that they lack useful economic skills means that they are unlikely to become productive to our society.

Obama keeps talking about immigration reform as the only way to fix this problem.  Another lie, of course, because the root of the problem is the perception that the children will be allowed to stay.  Ramp up deportation, don't let them cross in the first place.  Maybe even fund Mexico to secure their border.

What You Should Be Reading

• CDR Salamander, if you care at all about what is happening to our military and the Navy in particular.  He is particularly adept at deconstructing the ludicrousity of the diversity bullies.  But their latest antics leave him speechless, the comments are very funny to this Navy vet.  My favorite: A collection of the most intelligent non-PC minds in the universe COULD. NOT. POSSIBLY. MAKE. THIS. SHIT. UP.--even if they tried for a thousand years--yet it all comes naturally, automatically, reflexively to the PC crowd.
• Dalrock shows that divorce continues to plague America, despite what some people are asserting. I applaud his close look at the actual census numbers.
• In much better news, Carpe Diem reports that there are over 3000 breweries in America today.   The majority of Americans live within 10 miles of a local brewery, and with almost 2,000 planning breweries in the BA database, that percentage is only going to climb in the coming years.

Bonnie Dumanis - Political Death Watch

I didn't vote for Bonnie Dumanis, because my gut instinct was that too many years in office, coupled with a high-handed attitude meant that there was some corruption lurking.  Bob Brewer didn't run a very good campaign, so he lost.  Now I am watching the news for items that indicate her term in office is unraveling.  For the record, I didn't think that Filner would make it either.  Today, she released what would seem to be an innocuous letter of recommendation for a young man to be admitted to the University of San Diego.  Innocuous, if you didn't know the back story.

Liam Dillon, at the VOSD has a nice summary:

Dumanis was recommending the son of a man charged with making more than half a million dollars in illegal contributions to local campaigns – including Dumanis’ own mayoral bid. 

Dumanis allegedly benefitted from hundreds of thousands of dollars in illegal contributions from Jose Susumo Azano Matsura, a wealthy Mexican citizen. Dumanis hasn’t been accused of any wrongdoing in the case, but she has consistently given misleading and incomplete statements about how well she knew Azano and the actions she took on his behalf before and after he allegedly helped finance her losing 2012 mayoral campaign.

Dillon goes on to make the case that Dumanis' account of her relationship doesn't appear truthful, including the whopper that she didn't write the letter on official stationery of the DA's office.  Let's say that's true; then this letter certainly is a fraud, as it looks like official stationery and she signs as "San Diego County District Attorney."

For more on the whole Azano affair, the U-T has a series of interesting articles, including details of Dumanis' prosecution in 2003 of a youth who allegedly shot Azano's son with a pellet gun.  This case was eventually dismissed.

Dave Maass, who did some great original reporting that eventually led to the prosecutions in this case, says that this letter shows that Dumanis violated the California Public Records Act by withholding the letter when it was requested.  Maybe that's why she is sticking with the whopper that it isn't "official."

Dumanis has now provided proof that she violated CPRA when she did not turn this over in 2012 to my request. https://t.co/6oyHrAk3Iq
— Defunct Dave (@DaveMaass) July 9, 2014

What You Should Be Reading

• KTCat accurately summarizes the current state of foreign affairs as normal; if normal means there isn't any regard for the U.S. role as enforcer of norms.
• Not Thomas Piketty, darling of the left for claiming that wealth inequality is worsening.  Read Alan Reynolds on why Piketty's numbers are fanciful.
• And in more proof that leftist, progressive policies are racist policies, Milton Friedman takes down the minimum wage and why it has disparate impact on blacks.

"Moreover, the effects have been concentrated on the groups that the do-gooders would most like to help. The people who have been hurt most by the minimum wage laws are the blacks. I have often said that the most anti-black law on the books of this land is the minimum wage law."

Crumbling Arguments of the Left - Unemployment

Democrats like to argue that extending unemployment benefits somehow benefits the economy because, well I can't even remember an argument they presented that was coherent enough to merit repeating.  The actual facts on the ground have proved difficult.  First, hooray for Federalism, North Carolina went its own way on the issue of unemployment benefits.

A year ago, North Carolina became the first state in the nation to exit the federal government's extended-benefits program for the unemployed. 

The left and the media, but I repeat myself, were of course outraged, and outrageous protests of outrage ensued.  Then, reality.

North Carolina didn't descend into the Dickensian nightmare critics predicted. For the last six months of 2013, it was the only state where jobless recipients weren't eligible for extended benefits. Yet during that period North Carolina had one of the nation's largest improvements in labor-market performance and overall economic growth. 

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of payroll jobs in North Carolina rose by 1.5% in the second half of 2013, compared with a 0.8% rise for the nation as a whole. Total unemployment in the state dropped by 17%, compared with the national average drop of 12%. The state's official unemployment rate fell to 6.9% in December 2013 from 8.3% in June, while the nationwide rate fell by eight-tenths of a point to 6.7%.

Meanwhile on the national level we see the same scenario playing out.

Krauthammer noted that the sharp drop in unemployment has coincided with the end of emergency unemployment benefits. Obama and the Democrats, who insisted that the benefits be extended, wrongly predicted that their expiration would come as a calamity to the poor. Instead, their end has demonstrably had “precisely the opposite effect.” 

“These six months coincide with a decrease in the medium length of unemployment from 17 weeks to 13 weeks — the largest six-month decline in the length of unemployment ever measured,” he said. “Which means the real problem of long-term unemployment was a function of this anomaly of emergency-extended unemployment, which should never have happened, and whose end has contributed to this excellent result. The debate on that extension is over, and the conservatives were right.”

Thomas Sowell pretty much sums up the left's inability to see reason (although speaking about central planning):

But, by the end of the 20th century, even socialist and communist governments began abandoning central planning and allowing more market competition. Yet this quiet capitulation to inescapable realities did not end the noisy claims of the Left.

By the way, under disparate impact theory, leftism is racism.  Here's how: Unemployment disproportionately hurts minorities. Leftist policies exacerbate unemployment, therefore disparate impact, therefore racism.  See how easy that was.

What You Should Be Reading.

• The WSJ editorial pages detail even more Democrat inspired race-baiting rhetoric.  Just part of a scheme to have HUD replace your local zoning board, because, you know, racism.
• The bizarre U.S. corporate tax code is ensuring that may big, formerly U.S. firms become foreign owned.  I note that Coors, Miller and Anheuser-Busch are all foreign owned.
• KTCat sums up the so-called compassion for illegal immigrants in clear concise prose.
• Unfortunately, not Dean at Beers with Demo, who seems to have taken an unannounced hiatus from blogging.

Independence Day

The words of the Declaration of Independence continue to inspire after more than two centuries. It's words and principles inspire the tea party movement and I believe is a source of discomfort to those on the left, even if they won't admit it.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

I continue to be optimistic for our country.  The institutions being built by the left cannot endure in competition with the institutions built by free markets and civil society.  I will blog more about their successive failures; but consider the disaster the left is making of our health-care system and the implosion of so-called liberal arts as the worth of those degrees continues to be revealed.  In the early 1980s, I came to believe that it was only a matter of time before the Soviet Union collapsed due to economic and ethnic forces; and that belief was rewarded.  I believe the same thing about the left and its attempts to control every aspect of American life.  People resent it, and eventually fight back and win.

• The militarization of the nation's police forces is harmful to liberty, see a great compendium at AlterNet.  (H/T CarpeDiem).  The founders would be appalled, no doubt.
• Minimum wage response?  McDonald's experimenting with mobile platform tech for ordering ahead.
• I always thought that it was in our long term best interests to divide into three countries; our failure to do so has enabled further Sunni radicalization under ISIS.  See commentary from Israel in Haaretz on this subject.  Washington's warning against foreign adventures accrued precisely to our inability to understand the roots of these foreign conflicts.  The situation remains fluid, but I expect ISIS to consolidate gains and unite portions of Syria and Iraq, see HotAir.
• KTCat asks how compassionate is it to allow kids to trek across Mexico to the U.S. border?  He argues for border enforcement, but I think the deeper issue is that the world has come to believe that the Obama administration will not deport anyone.  How compassionate is that policy turning out to be?
• The Volokh Conspiracy for nuanced understanding of Constitutional law from a conservative/libertarian perspective.  Randy Barnett has a great explanation of the Declaration of Independence today.  He makes the great point that even then, the founders considered ourselves "a people" who had inalienable rights.

What You Should Know - Today's Supreme Court Decisions

The real action in today's Supreme Court rulings was not in the Hobby Lobby case. The Court struck down the idea that unions could extend their reach in Illinois personal health care assistants in a blow to the public employees' unions.  Because the case was decided on First Amendment grounds, the court signal that they may be willing to do away with all public employee union dues collection that goes to political purposes and may impose further limits in the future.  This could be a big blow for worker's freedom and a big drain on union coffers. See Eugene Volokh's superb analysis at Reason.

Meanwhile, the Hobby Lobby case was determined on narrow statutory grounds, not constitutional ones. The court ruled that Hobby Lobby had a right to not fund contraception under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, no free speech case here. That's not to say that there weren't important constitutional principles involved. The Supreme Court ruled that corporations can be considered persons for the purpose of guaranteeing constitutional protections. Ilya Somin helpfully explains at The Volokh Conspiracy.

What You Should Be Reading:

• Dalrock comments on the strange convergence of conservatives and feminists regarding marriage.  Preview: He doesn't think its good.
• KT helpfully explains the synergy between fascism and spending all of your country's cash.  
• And more in the continuing sage of police treating ordinary citizens as subjects, the Chief of Police in Salt Lake City gets annoyed that people are protesting one of his officers shooting a family dog.

Key Minimum Wage Facts

Half of all minimum wage earners are young people entering the work force (under 24).  Source: BLS.

In 2012, almost two-thirds of minimum wage workers (64.4%) were part-time workers. Source: BLS.

About 2.8% of all workers are paid at or below the minimum wage.  Over half of that number are paid below minimum wage. Source: BLS.

Of the 3.6 million people who earned at or below minimum wage in 2012, 2.0 million earned less than the minimum wage.  Source: BLS.
---Conclusion raising the minimum wage would only help 1.6 million or 1.2% of the workforce, because those making less than minimum wage are already operating outside of the law.

Of Course Drug Laws Have Racist Component

Rand Paul, speaking in Iowa, points out the fact that our nation's drug laws disproportionately target African-Americans and Hispanics.  From Media-ite:

Paul spoke out against the racial biases present in U.S. drug laws. “I think drugs are a scourge. I think we’ve maybe gone too far and that marijuana is a problem,” Paul said. “And yet I also think it’s a problem to lock people up for 10 and 15 and 20 years for youthful mistakes.”

The history of the origin of laws against marijuana show their explicitly racist origins.

The truth is that our perceptions of marijuana—and in fact all of our drug laws—are based on early 20th century racism and “science” circa the Jim Crow era. In the early decades of the 20th century, the drug was linked to Mexican immigrants and black jazzmen, who were seen as potentially dangerous. 

Harry Anslinger, the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (an early predecessor of the DEA), was one of the driving forces behind pot prohibition. He pushed it for explicitly racist reasons, saying, “Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men,” and:  

"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."

Good for Rand Paul for taking this on.  Now if Republicans would get serious about supporting charter schools and vouchers as well, they might make inroads with black and Hispanics.

Hard Truths About Minimum Wage - Who Should I Fire?

My income is fixed but decent, so I choose to employ maids and gardeners.  My choice results in extra coin in the pocket of people whom I know are not near as well off as myself.  The hard truth about a minimum wage increase of the size being contemplated by the San Diego City Council is that I can't really afford to continue to employ both.  So who should I fire, the maids or the gardeners?  This is the hard truth about the minimum wage.  My income is set by law, it's not going to change, so those are my choices to deal with rising costs.  Those arguing for the minimum wage will tell me that I am not paying those people enough, but when someone loses that income, I'll bet they would prefer that I still employed them.  Further, I won't be the only one making such a choice; some people are going to lose their jobs with a minimum wage hike.

The other hard fact is that the people who really need employment, the young, will be disproportionately shut out of the job market by a minimum wage rise.  From the BLS:

Minimum wage workers tend to be young. Although workers under age 25 represented only about one-fifth of hourly paid workers, they made up about half of those paid the Federal minimum wage or less. Among employed teenagers paid by the hour, about 21 percent earned the minimum wage or less, compared with about 3 percent of workers age 25 and over. 

And from the Heritage foundation (also based on 2012 statistics):

The characteristics of the teenagers and young adults who earn the minimum wage or less support the notion that these minimum-wage workers rarely work to support children and their families:

• 79 percent work part-time jobs.
• 62 percent are enrolled in school during non-summer months.
• Their average family income is $65,900 per year.
• Only 22 percent live at or below the poverty line, while 68 percent enjoy family incomes over 150 percent of the poverty line, which is $33,500 for a family of four.[6]
• Most have not finished their education. A third have not yet finished high school, while almost a quarter have only a high school degree. Another two-fifths have taken college courses but have not yet graduated. Many of these are college students working part-time while in school. Only 3 percent have finished college and obtained a degree.

Only 3.7 million workers in the U.S. earn the minimum wage or less, which is about 2% of the workforce.  This doesn't do much about income inequality, if that is your current shibboleth.  This is a solution in search of a problem.

Finally, when we look at employment statistics, we find that the young are the ones suffering in the lack of growth in the economy:

Here is the civilian labor force participation rate for those over 55 since 2000:

U.S. Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate for age 55+. Source bls.gov.

And here is the same data for the youngsters (16-24).

U.S. Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate (16-24). Source bls.gov.

It is pretty obvious that the drop in participation rate is far greater for the younger age population. They are the ones leaving the work force; don't believe the lies that labor participation is down because baby boomers are retiring.  The old goats are hanging on to their jobs like the bitter clingers they are. Demographic trends of the older folks retiring is pure bunk. These statistics bode ill for the future because we aren't getting youth employed when they should be starting their working careers and learning skills.

You know what would really help lack of youth employment? Increasing the minimum wage to further disconnect their pay from their skill levels.

California Primary Results - San Diego

I am leaving early on a trip, but I am pretty pleased with the early returns in San Diego.  In Council District 2, Lorie Zapf seems to have a good chance at clearing the 50% threshold to avoid a run off in November.  Propositions B & C also appear headed for defeat, a huge victory for jobs in here in the city.  I live in the 52nd CA congressional district and it looks like a Peters (D) vs DeMaio (R) match up in November.  Peters is only showing 43% of the vote in early returns, against the Republicans seeking to replace him.  I don't think that bodes well for his November odds.

At the state level, it seems as though Kashkari will beat out Donnelly for the right to face Jerry Brown.  I am under no illusions that the Republican can take back the Governor's mansion, so my support, went to the man who was having an effective outreach and effectively hammering home Jerry Brown's support for the "Crazy Train" aka High Speed Choo-Choo.  Checking other results, I am amazed to see two Republicans in the lead for State Controller at this time, Ashley Swearingin and David Evans.  

Right now I am listening to Scott Peters giving a pretty lame defense of the Bergdahl deal today, but he backtracked with "I wasn't consulted and not sure if it was a good deal."

On the down side, Democrats are still in control of this state.  Also, I didn't vote for Bonnie Dumanis, but she may avoid a run off.  I don't know if Brewer would be so great, but her ethical challenges after 12 years in office deserve closer scrutiny. 

Propositions B & C in San Diego - Slow Death for Shipbuilding

With the June 3, primary election approaches, I want to touch on Propositions B and C which are not getting enough attention.  These propositions deserve a No vote, because they would codify the City Council's approval of a plan that would limit commercial zoning in Barrio Logan; and in my opinion start the slow strangulation of the shipbuilding and ship repair industry in San Diego.  Naturally, I am opposed.  The key issue is that the plan calls for a buffer between the current industrial area and the housing surrounding it.  However, this buffer will effectively drive out some of the businesses that are currently part of the shipbuilding ecosystem of the area.  From the U-T:

Shipyard leaders have expressed concern that the new plan could drive up suppliers’ costs, make San Diego less competitive and possibly prompt the Navy to contract ship building elsewhere.

Even the left-leaning VOSD acknowledges how the plan impacts shipbuilding related industry:

The major disagreement is over that dark purple band north of Harbor Drive. The plan makes it a place for commercial properties only — not industrial businesses or homes — so there would be a “buffer” between heavy industrial activity and residences. 

Right now, that’s home to companies that support the shipyards. Those companies could stay, but they’d have limited expansion options, and new companies trying to open there would need a special permit, which the community would have a say on.

Since businesses always come and go, the plan amounts to a long term path to squeeze industrial businesses out of the area north of Harbor Drive.  The linked article has some decent maps showing the impact.

The other argument on the No side is that it would put new homes near the I-5 causing health concerns for those residents.  I am not as concerned about this issue, as people can choose to live near freeways if they want.  My real concern is for jobs in this city.

Is my headline a bit of hyperbole? Sure, but so is the argument that this won't impact a job producing industry in the long run.  I am voting no on Propositions B & C.  There are quite a few retired admiral's who care about the Navy's presence in San Diego who agree with me.

Photo courtesy of No on B & C website.

Memorial Day Reflection - Socialized Medicine for Veterans

As we reflect on the service of Americans who gave their lives in war this Memorial Day, I also reflect on the care given those who sacrificed a great deal and must now depend upon the Veterans Administration to treat their service related injuries.  You can read for yourself about the scandal of longer and longer wait times; and the lying about those facts.  Boiled down to its essentials, the scandal is about rationing care through wait times and lying about rationing care and those same wait times.  Bernie Sanders, self avowed socialist and chair of the Senate VA committee, essentially admitted to the first part by saying that there weren't enough resources to provide care.  News flash - When the Government provides goods and services we always seem to run out.

This goes to the heart of the larger issue.  Democrats have always claimed they were the party you should elect to run government competently.  But the government has grown so vast and complex, it is impossible to do so.  Obama's surprise at finding each new scandal in his administration is almost understandable, given the federal government's vast size. But the solution must come from getting government smaller, and definitely shedding its role as direct provider of services.

With regards to veterans, we clearly need to provide them with insurance alternatives to allow them to make use of private sector medicine.  They deserve to be freed of the incompetent monopoly provisioning of health care by the federal government. John McCain has said that he will make such a proposal.  Count on the left to oppose this move.  They have touted the VA as a model for single payer in the past.  To allow out-sourcing would undermine their arguments for socialized medicine, as Krugman calls the VA system in the linked article.

Reason.com gives a great synopsis what passes for "success" in the VA's socialized medical system.

How could a bloated government bureaucracy achieve such low-cost success? As we found out recently, it's by quietly sticking veterans on a waiting list and putting off their treatment for months—sometimes until the patients are far too dead to need much in the way of expensive care. Which is to say, calling it a "success" is stretching the meaning of the word beyond recognition.

On this Memorial Day, although a time for reflection about those who have died; we should support the living veterans as well, by prising their health care from the monopoly of the federal government.

What You Should Be Reading

• KTCat equates moral relativism Houston Astro fandom.  Read it, it makes sense.
• Left Coast Rebel has great hashtag for Obama on the VA scandal.
• For Memorial Day, I am embedding one of the greatest speeches for the occasion ever given, by Ronald Reagan, of course. (The text of a different but great speech here.)

Weekend Music Chill

Since I haven't been blogging regularly, I have also not been posting weekend music.  This is a mistake.  One of my favorite bands from the 1970s was ELO; here is some of their lesser known work that I have always admired.  For some reason, I can't get an ELO channel to produce consistent results for a Pandora channel.

Kuiama



Here is the 10538 Overture, which seemed an appropriate ending tune for American Hustle, a film that I really liked.  Jennifer Lawrence pleasantly surprised in a supporting role.

Unions Fund Libertarian

. . . Campaign Flyer.  Who'd a thunk it?  This flyer showed up at my house.

Unions are getting involved in the San Diego City Council District 2 race and spending money to help the Libertarian candidate, Mark Schwartz. Let's be clear, Schwartz has no chance of being elected.

If you read the fine print at the bottom, you will see that the San Diego - Imperial Counties Labor Council sponsored this flyer, along with the city Municipal Employees Association.  When I saw this show up, I was immediately suspicious.  I was a libertarian for a long time, and slick campaign flyers were almost always outside of the budget wherewithal of our candidates.

Why would the unions fund Schwartz?  It is pretty obvious, in my opinion.  They are hoping to drain enough votes from Zapf to prevent her from winning the primary outright against Progressive darling Sarah Boot.  The unions want minimum wage increases, banning of managed competition and an end to pension reform, which puts them in opposition to Zapf.  Do they really want Schwartz elected?  Here is a little of what he says on his campaign website: "I will"

- Support free market economy and free enterprise locally by working to reduce tax burden and permitting costs to San Diego businesses.
- Champion cutting tax waste with privatization of city services (managed competition,) opening small businesses bid opportunities to fill city needs.
- Vote NO on any proposed ordinance that increases tax burden on citizens. I will speak out against any new propositions or bonds to be levied on the citizens that infringe on property rights and freedom.

No way do unions support these positions.  In fact, they are exactly the positions already taken by Zapf, only she has actually taken action.  For example, she personally collected signatures to rescind the linkage fee.  I just wanted to point out to readers that voting for Schwartz is essentially a vote for Sarah Boot and an endorsement of the union platform for city government.

What You Should Be Reading

• The WSJ has been documenting vast prosecutorial over reach in the suppression of the first amendment rights of groups to advocate for issues.  Their editorial pages documents the latest smack down of Democratic prosecutors in the Badger state. 
• Dalrock has an expert takedown of Ms. Obama's pouty faced hashtag photo.  You know the one.
• The mindless leftist idiocy, but I repeat myself, of commencement speaker protests is reviewed by Daniel Henninger in Bonfire of the Humanities.  Liberal Arts as a major is imploding, because no one wants to hire people whose sole education has been to repeat stupid (and untrue) slogans.  Even the mere presence of camels is considered racist on today's college campus.
• KTCat goes to New Jersey and discovers heteronorming patriarchal oppression among the Osprey population. (The birds, not the aircraft.)

Update From Bob Brewer Campaign on Handgun Issue

I asked the Bob Brewer for DA campaign what the candidate's position was with regards to Drake v Jerejian, which revolves around requirement by the state of New Jersey that permitted handgun owner show "justifiable need" to be issued a permit to carry in public.  I did so because one of my beefs with Bonnie Dumanis during her tenure as DA was signing an amicus brief asking the courts to deny an individual right to bear arms in Heller v District of Columbia.  Drake v Jerejian was being considered by the Supreme Court at the time I asked the question, but has the petition to hear the case was subsequently denied.  Regardless, here is Bob Brewer's campaign manager's (Alex Roth) response to my query:

After Heller and McDonald, we were not surprised to see the Supreme Court taking up Drake v. Jerejian.  We don’t believe that the District Attorney should be filing amicus briefs on the issue – like Bonnie Dumanis did in Heller when she filed an amicus brief supporting DC’s (thereafter overturned) ban on keeping firearms in the home for self-defense.  We can’t be certain of the ruling or scope of the Court’s review in Drake, and Peruta allowed individuals to have a CCW without “good cause.” Therefore, this is the current state of the law.  As District Attorney, Bob Brewer is committed to enforcing the law.

That is probably as good as I was going to get from an attorney running for public office.  I appreciate that he wouldn't file amicus briefs against 2nd amendment challenges.  Certainly the reference to Peruta v County of San Diego is good; still, I was hoping for a more robust defense of the 2nd amendment in the response; but certainly better than Dumanis.

Sarah Boot - Progressive?

Oh yeah, and by progressive, that means a person of the left as opposed to a mere SWPL-y person of pallor.

Sarah Boot is running against quasi-incumbent Lorie Zapf for San Diego City Council in District 2.  For full disclosure, recent redistricting moved my home from District 6 to District 2, like Zapf. I am very interested in this race. San Diego City Beat has this to say about Boot:

In 2010, she was selected as a fellow for the San Diego chapter of the New Leaders Council, which aims to train “progressive political entrepreneurs” for leadership roles, elected office among them. She’s also a founding member of Run Women Run, a local organization focused on getting politically progressive women in office. [emphasis mine.]

On her campaign web site, Boot promises to work for neighborhoods and public safety.  Both Mayor Faulconer, the former Council-member from the district, and Council-member Zapf made this a priority in their campaigns as well.  You have to go to her issues page to find the evidence of left-leaning tendencies.  Even what you find there is pretty mild.

I will work to provide all San Diegans with good paying jobs in industries of the future not dead end jobs of the past.  These are jobs in “green” industries such as alternative energy like solar and wind and retrofitting our public buildings and “blue” industries that take advantage of our port and ocean front maritime trades.  Whether its promoting “green” or “blue” technologies or championing our local biotech businesses, San Diego needs a city government that is forward thinking and uses our economic development dollars wisely.

But there is not a word about the key issues which have divided the city council of late, the minimum wage debate, the zoning in Bario Logan, pension reform, the hotel tax, linkage fees nor managed competition.  So a little research is in order.  By the way, green jobs are a myth.  I notice that the left has always had a tendency to hide their positions, but I digress.

On the issue of the linkage fee, dumbest tax ever, Boot made her support known in the OB town council debate.  Her stance on the linkage fee is disqualifying, in my opinion.  I can't find reference to Boot's stance on managed competition, although Zapf vigorously supported the concept in the PB and Clairemont forums.  On the issue of the minimum wage, Boot makes her progressive bona fides clear by supporting some sort of increase in an interview with Frank Gormlie in the OBRag. She also discusses the importance of climate disruption change (maybe she hadn't gotten the memo) and other progressive shibboleths.  In the same interview she exhibits hostility towards outsourcing, although not the same as managed competition, might certainly be an indicator.

If Sarah Boot is elected to the city council, we can expect major intrusions by city government and a very union friendly 6-3 Democrat majority on the council.  It means no to any more pension reform, managed competition or any other efforts to keep city costs under control.  Further, plastic bag bans, changes to how we get our electricity, raising minimum wages so my son can lose his job and general interference in our lives will be on its way.  I think Lorie Zapf has been great on the City Council, but even if she had been mediocre, I would still be endorsing her over Sarah Boot.

What You Should Be Reading

• Giving us hope for this generations of collegiate students, UNC Sophomore Timothy Bame writes about the myth of clean energy.  45% of the electricity generated in the United States is through the use of coal. It is also by far the cheapest form of electricity and the easiest to obtain, yet it remains in plentiful supply. (H/T College Insurrection).  I would add that the shift to natural gas has reduced carbon emissions by more than any "green" technology ever will.
• Meanwhile, despite repeated claims that we need all that solar and wind because of peak oil, America is on a path to achieve its highest rates of petroleum production, evah!  
• State Rep Joseph Gibbons of FL points out that California's net-metering policies are subsidizing solar power providers because they avoid paying for the electrical that they depend upon.  As someone who has recently received some quotes for solar, I worry that a change to a rationale policy for connecting to the grid will change my savings calculations.

San Diego District Attorney's Race - Can Brewer Close the Deal?

Bonnie Dumanis ran unopposed in her last run for District Attorney; this year she faces opponents Bob Brewer and Terri Wyatt. I am unhappy with Dumanis, but not ready to endorse an opponent.  First my airing of grievances against Dumanis.

• Prior to running for mayor, Dumanis had the opportunity to make her voice heard on Proposition D, the half-cent sales tax increase; she demurred.  Carl DeMaio's strong support stood in stark contrast and was a key element in my support for his mayoral bid.
• She joined an amicus brief against arguing against gun rights in DC v Heller. The argument presented was that we need to violate the 2nd amendment because it would harm our ability to prosecute gun related crime.  I have zero sympathy for that position.  Law enforcement that does not take seriously upholding citizen's rights while enforcing the law sets precedents for tyranny.
• Her prosecutions in the area of medical marijuana have not helped San Diego normalize this situation.  Further, her office claimed that a number of arrests were to protect military families when in fact they were medical marijuana patients.  Further, she appears vindictive in her attitude towards the "crime" of medical marijuana use.  I have been made aware by family members and by a doctor of how medical marijuana can be helpful to people suffering.

In short, Dumanis appears to act with disdain towards the subjects citizens who elected her.  In fact, she has held office for too long; it's not healthy.  In general, I believe in term limits.

Of Dumanis' challengers, I am less sympathetic to the candidacy of Terri Wyatt.  Her case is that she is a career prosecutor and not a politician.  So what?  The office is political.  It should respond to the people.  Part of the problem with Dumanis is her lengthy stay in office.  Why would I expect a career prosecutor to be any more sympathetic to my concerns over individual rights than Dumanis?

But I am also not overwhelmed by what I see with Bob Brewer. His first TV ad touts law enforcement endorsements; I find the endorsements of public employee unions to be a negative.  Bob Brewer is claiming that Dumanis' run for mayor in 2012 showed that she can no longer run the DA's office. I don't think that matters, unless he can show that this led to unethical behavior as DA.  His pledge not to make endorsements as DA is more salient.  The DA can easily be required to investigate the city attorney or mayor, and not having to recuse herself, as Dumanis had to with the Filner issues, would be a big plus.  Brewer accuses Dumanis of cronyism in her operation of the District Attorney's office.  This is hard to prove, although the U-T wasn't sympathetic early in her tenure. This issue with a researcher who endorsed a Dumanis opponent also looks fishy.

I am actually more sympathetic to Brewer's life experience as a Vietnam War veteran, prosecutor and then defense attorney.  His varied career, and the personal hardship he has overcome make me more confident in his judgement.

I am still doing more research before I endorse.