Dear Friends:

Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) is a bad choice for residents and consumers.
Government can't offer cheaper, more reliable electricity.

Government can't offer cheaper, more reliable electricity because of mandated
renewable energy, solar and wind, must be used in the production of electricity.

Renewable energy is taxpayer subsidized; once the subsidy is gone, electricity rates
will go up.

Community Choice Aggregation is a new program that allows California city
governments to operate “communitywide electricity buyers’ programs.” Commonly
known as community choice aggregators, or CCAs, these are new government
agencies created by Joint Powers Agreement among several cities. Additionally,
individual cities may run their own CCA programs.

Our local utility company, Edison, will still provide transmission, distribution and
customer billing services to the CCA agency for a fee that is passed along to
consumers.

Once our city council decides to join or establish a CCA, all residents are
automatically enrolled in the program. It will be up to individual residents to “opt
out” and continue with their regular service with Edison.
CCAs are vulnerable to changing market conditions. Energy procurement is risky,
complex, costly and long-term. Because withdrawal from CCA membership is costprohibitive,
our city’s decision to join binds future City Councils and future
generations of taxpayers.

CCAs operate without adequate oversight, virtually invisible to the public. Creating
Joint Powers Agencies (JPAs), such as CCAs, costs taxpayers money. JPAs employ
staff, set up offices and, most importantly, make decisions -- such as issue debt --
for which taxpayers are responsible but have no knowledge or say. JPA governing
board members are not directly elected by voters, which contributes to their
relative obscurity and lack of transparency.

Does the nominal increase in renewable energy use promised by CCAs justify their
risks? Unequivocally, no.

Local government doesn’t belong in the electricity business. It is reckless for
government to gamble on risky ventures for which it is ill-prepared and
unqualified. “Green” energy companies, consultants, activists and lobbyists all
stand to gain politically and financially from the proliferation of CCAs. Public
agencies rely on some of these same sources for advice on CCAs -- a clear conflict of
interest.

Today’s cities and counties struggle to provide essential services, including basic
public safety and human services. Throwing precious tax dollars into a CCA money
pit won’t help the environment, but will burden future generations with additional
unwanted debt.

Take Action Now:

The city of Hermosa Beach is scheduled to introduce the government electricity
ordinance exploring options to form a CCA at the August 23 meeting.
Please see this 3 minute video of the previous Hermosa Beach Mayor, whose
professional background is in business finance, explain how the new CCA energy
plan will likely deceive residents into unknowingly sign up for “clean” energy.
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0pPzFVzWO0
You can read the proposed program here and watch the video of the last council
meeting discussion from July 26, 2016 here. (Time stamp 3:46:00).
Submit your comments to the city clerk before noon on Monday, August 15,
2016 to be included in the City Council regularly printed agenda for the meeting on
Tuesday August 23, 2016. Later submissions will be included in the online agenda
up to the afternoon of the 23rd.

Send e-mail comments to cityclerk@hermosabch.org
Group email for the City Council: citycouncil@hermosabch.org
Here are some suggested comments that you can use. Additional letters submitted
to council are here under Attachments. Please feel free to put them into your own
words:

1. Please be aware of the issues that have surfaced since; per the (past)
Mayor of Hermosa Beach:

• Once residents agree to be part of the CCA plan for Electricity, they can not back
out. It is permanent.
• The introductory costs (on their SCE bill) are based on temporary credits, so
the real costs will be later and are permanent increases.
• It is based on the cost of clean energy, which has never been lower than fossil
fuels.
The most significant ramifications are:
• this permanent subsidy to "clean" manufactures eliminates any incentive for
them to make clean efficient

• there is no limit to the amount of increases you would be subjecting your
residents to

• there is a lack of accountability as to whether it is really "clean" and how much;
huge exposure for fraud

As someone who cares passionately about the environment, I think we can do a much
better job through innovation and integrity.

I will share this information with others as well. DM

2. Hermosa Beach City Manager Tom Bakaly said during last week’s city council
meeting discussion on Community Choice Aggregation that we need to hurry up and
push this thing through in order to meet the city’s carbon neutrality goals. What he
didn’t suggest was for our city government to be practical or fiscally responsible. Do we
really want to dive into something that our city government knows little about and the
residents know even less about? Bakaly also said that this Community Choice
Aggregation program gives residents a choice to purchase renewable energy at a lower
rate than they could purchase from Edison. I did my own research on this and found
that in all four of the current California cities listed on the city’s deceptive marketing
piece that purchasing renewable power is more expensive than the standard bundle of
power residents are currently paying with Edison. If this program is implemented, all
residents will be automatically enrolled in the program, unless they make the effort to
opt out. Where is this “choice” Bakaly speaks of? If there is really a choice, then why is
the option not to opt IN instead of opting out? Very few residents have any idea what
this Community “Choice” Aggregation nonsense is. If this program is as financially
disastrous here in Hermosa as it is in Lancaster, we will all be paying for it, even those
who were wise enough to opt out. Tell your Hermosa Beach city council members to
say No to CCA. LA

3. From the postcard I just received, it might as well have said “City Council will
adopt Community Choice Aggregation on July 26…” rather than “consider”. With all
the misleading information on the back of this mailer, it would appear that CCA will be
moving ahead regardless.

I reviewed all the websites for the cherry picked “Current CCA programs in California”
and they all say the same thing: “greener energy at lower rates”. And then they proceed
to show a cost comparison that proves the exact opposite! The bottom line of the bill is
what counts, not just one of five or six lines of charges. Classic double speak.
Conveniently left off the mailer were all the failed CCAs, the startup and ongoing
expenses, and financial risk to the city at a time when we have other more pressing
basic functions to provide, not to mention debt service. How anyone can expect to
reduce costs by adding a board of directors, salaries, pensions and associated costs to a
system is beyond comprehension. This is such a common sense no-go it should not
even be on your agenda for consideration. This is why your meetings go to 1:00am.
You should direct the City Manager to stop padding your agenda with such nonstarters.
I was under the impression that you had adopted priority based budgeting. Either that
is not the case, staff doesn‘t know what that means, or you need a readjustment of
priorities. WB

Tracy Hopkins
Advocates for Hermosa Beach

JOIN By Liking No CCA in HB on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/NoCCAinHB/

Posted by Arthur Christopher Schaper
May 7, 2014

At first, I had no idea what to think when I learned about Malaysian-born Torrance resident Alex See.

I knew so little about him, compared to the other candidates whom I was researching, and it seemed to me that he was ill-prepared for his run for Torrance City Council. After all, he was on a business trip earlier this year, while other candidates were already prepping their campaigns with inaugural dinners.

In January, I invited him to come the school board meeting, along with other city council candidates.  Even though he had been overseas at the time, and had just returned home the night before, Alex arrived at the school board meeting, and gave me the opportunity of meeting him. Sharing his concerns about education as well as greater civic engagement from the Asian-American community in Torrance, Alex a small businessman (which he conveniently advertised at the North Torrance Home Owners Association two weeks ago) as well as engineer, Alex See has been a city fixture for many years.

Unlike some of the younger candidates for office, as well as the more seasoned public officials, Alex See promotes a semblance of honor and respect, willing to listen to others, considering the key needs of small businesses and employers in a city where regulations, fees, and taxes can cause more harm than good.  The fact that he took my calls and came to a public forum to speak with me was enough to win my vote.

Here are his answers to seven questions which I posed to him about himself, his campaign, and his plans once he gets elected:

1. Why are you running for city council this year? Did you ever plan on running for office before?

I am running for office because I want to give back to the community and to serve the city that my family and I call home. My family and I love living in Torrance because it is a diverse, well-balanced and safe community with an excellent school district. I have not seriously considered running until I read that that our mayor and most council members are encouraging diversity on the council to represent the city (ref. Daily Breeze’s article). For many years I have volunteered my time and resources to be an integral part of the success of this community. Therefore, I am running for Torrance City Council because I know that my unique background will add a different perspective to examining city issues and solutions.

2. You are a registered Republican. Why?

I am registered as a Republican because I believe in being fiscally responsible, small government, low taxes and family values.

3. Tell us about your prior professional/political experience and how they can help the City of Torrance?

I’ve served the Torrance Community as a Water Commissioner for 8 years. As a water commissioner, I have worked with fellow commissioners to ensure Torrance continues to provide low water rates (2nd lowest in the region), high quality and reliable potable water to its residents and businesses. I’ve also supported our amazing school district as a committee member on the TUSD Bonds Independent Citizens’ Oversight Committee, TUSD Facilities and Asset Review Committee and high school Site Council to ensure that our students have the proper means of gaining an education and skills to prepare them to enter the job market.

4. What measures, reforms, and policies would you implement on a city level to bring in more business and increase economic activity in the City of Torrance.

We need to attract and retain businesses to increase revenue for the City. As a small business owner in Torrance I am acutely aware of the necessity to have a Government environment that respects and encourage businesses to come and stay in our city. I strongly endorse any efforts to be a friendly city in an increasingly unfriendly business state. I will always be open to ideas for streamlining the system. Our one-stop permitting center was an effort in that direction and while that adds to the convenience, we must go a step further to cut through the red tape our city produces. We live in the 21st century and online services and permitting should be available for the conveniences of all citizens and businesses. Improvement and revamp of City websites need to ensure residents are well informed and know the facts.

5. What concerns do you have about crime and public safety in Torrance.

I am deeply satisfied with our fantastic public safety services. Living in one of the safest cities in America provides my family and I the security that we do will never take for granted. However, in addition to the rising pensions of public workers, my main concern is the recent release of criminals due to AB 109. Although, I am confident that our police and public safety officials will do all that is necessary to continue to provide the protection that we are accustomed to.

6. There are growing revelations about the city's massive pension liabilities -- $400 million, an online reports confirm that at least 600 city employees out of 200 are earning at least $100,000 a year in total compensation (per 2012 data). What reforms or steps do you support to deal with these massive pension liabilities?

The men and women who put their lives on the line every day to protect Torrance residents deserve to know that their hard work will benefit them in the future. It depends on what pension reform should look like. Pension reform is needed to prevent abuse and to make sure the system is sustainable. We need to incentives the best law enforcement candidates possible and Torrance residents deserve the best public safety officials available. If elected, I will work with the rest of the Council and the City Manager to make sure that we have the funds for a first-class police department that will not cut corners on the shoulders of the men and women who protect us.

7. How have residents and prospective voters responded to your campaign?

So far I have received a lot of positive feedback from the voters I have spoken with. Most like what I stand for, the work I have done for the community and share similar values. Like most candidates running for office, I have received the occasional voter who was either unaware of the June 3rd election or tend to have a general dislike of politics. All in all, I am greatly surprised and happy with all the support I have received and it encourages me to continue fighting for what I believe in, helping our city and citizens progress into a better tomorrow.

From private sector investment to public sector involvement, Alex See is worth seeing and voting for.

On June 3rd, please vote for Alex See for Torrance City Council

Arthur Christopher Schaper is a teacher-turned-writer on topics both timeless and timely; political, cultural, and eternal. A life-long Southern California resident, Arthur currently lives in Torrance.

Twitter -- @ArthurCSchaper
https://www.facebook.com/arthurchristopher.schaper
arthurschaper@hotmail.com
aschaper1.blogspot.com
asheisministries.blogspot.com
waxmanwatch.blogspot.com

In the city of Torrance there is a place you should know about. Tucked away between Carson and Maple Streets, in the corner of an office building on Crenshaw Boulevard is The Torrance Pregnancy Help Center.

  This is a wonderful place that holds a message of HOPE to all who enter, for the born and unborn alike. For this is a nonprofit agency dedicated to the helping of those, who may find themselves with an unplanned pregnancy and in need of short or long term assistance.

This is an organization dedicated to the service of the most vulnerable among us. Many of the women who enter may be young and totally unprepared to handle the situation they now find themselves in. Scared and not knowing what to do, or where to turn for help, the Center is always there for them. And this is why the Center is so important, for this is a safe caring environment staffed with people who only want the best for all involved.

The mission of the Pregnancy Help Center is, “to provide a safe, caring environment where every woman facing a crisis pregnancy can receive counseling, education, and practical assistance in order to eliminate the crisis and choose life for her baby; and to inspire others to embrace sexual health and integrity.” Other services provided are: pregnancy testing, ultrasound, STD testing along with the counseling.  These services are free for all clients, and are part of the Center’s operating costs.

  So this is where you and I come in, and why we all need to Walk for Life on May 17th. We are not only walking to raise money for the Pregnancy Help Center, but also to raise awareness for the Center; because the life of the unborn is not something to be taken casually, or ignored.  If God counts every sparrow that falls from the sky, how much more will He remember those who are the most vulnerable among us?

So now it’s time to take action and prepare to walk, so take out your day planner, grab your check book, and write down this date, time and place: May 17, 2014, Veteran’s Park in Redondo Beach California, 90277, between the hours of 8:30- 11:00 a.m. That’s when and where the 27th annual Walk for Life is going to take place.

Onsite registration will start at 7:15, with the Walk actually beginning at 8:30 a.m., with all ending promptly at 11:00 a.m.

Online registration is available at http://www.ministrysync.com/event/?e=6079.

Also there will also be a fundraiser for the Center at California Pizza Kitchen in the Manhattan Village, 3280 N. Sepulveda Blvd in Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 all day on May 28th with 20% of your check will go to the Pregnancy Center. To take part in this fundraising event  please bring an event flyer which can either be picked up at the Walk or at the center itself.

For more information on either of these events, to volunteer or donate to the Center, please call the Torrance Pregnancy Help Center: 1311 Crenshaw Blvd. Suite A, Torrance, Ca. 90501, 310-320-8976, www.supportphctorrance.org.

So, I am looking forward to seeing you all at the beach, where we will walk for Life. And please remember EVERY STEP MATTERS!

-Michael

Posted by Arthur Christopher Schaper
April, 21, 2014

Mayoral candidate Pat Furey, a county employee retiring within days with a public pension, slammed the “pension envy” he hears from workers in the private sector who question the generous wages and benefits paid to police officers. (The Daily Breeze)

Creating a new psychological (or psychoanalytic?) disorder, Torrance Councilmember and mayoral candidate Patrick Furey unleashed his fury on private sector employees who criticize the massive pension payouts of public employee..

For the record, many Torrance residents, and likely voters, are private sector employees and small business owners. Still, why would anyone feel “pension envy”?

A growing number of Torrance public safety officers make more than one hundred thousand dollars a year, then take 90% of their salary upon retirement. One retired officer shared with me that the pension formulas shifted in the 1990s, and while he funded his retirement adequately, so that his disbursements would not undermine the pension fund. Another public worker, in Rhode Island, invested his retirement through a private system, so that he would be neither gouging his constituents nor jeopardizing his future.

Pension funding is a serious issue, nonetheless.

Four California cities have gone bankrupt because of unsustainable pension obligations to retired employees. Statewide stats affirm that eighty percent of public school revenues fund retirement pensions and benefits, as well. Cities should serve residents, and schools are supposed to serve students, providing a safe environment to live and thrive. Yet most cities may not survive the liabilities laid upon them because of generous contracts negotiated between public employee unions and prior city councils. Who will protect us from our protectors, indeed?

Instead of “pension envy”, perhaps the proper term should be pension outrage, or entitled entitlement exasperation. El Segundo has had few fires or deaths, and yet the Police Chief is on track to take home nearly $200,000 a year in pensions. In Lawndale, Centinela Valley Union High School District Superintendent Jose Fernandez negotiated a lucrative contract with a compliant school board, which offered to him a base pay near equal to the LAUSD Superintendent, in spite of the fact that he supervises a district one hundredth the size of LAUSD. The perks and pension “air time” offered to the superintendent vaulted his 2013 salary to $663,000. Hermosa Beach parking enforcers make a minimum of $53,000 a year, yet Hermosa Beach’s sewer system needs to be revamped.

And now to Torrance, CA. The Wall Street Journal featured the largest South Bay city in a list of municipalities with overwhelming pension liabilities -- $392,000,000to be precise. Torrance’s Finance Director Eric Tsao disputed the accounting in a Letter to the Editor, arguing that the city’s current expenditures only total 12% toward pensions. Yet percentages can be misleading, as they hide the real costs of pension liabilities, just as California Governor Jerry Brown could declared “We have balanced the budget!” while ignored the enormous wall of debt from public employee benefits.

True, safety officers risk their lives, and in the past they did not survive five years past retirement. Yet today, more public safety employees do live and thrive for decades after leaving the work force, thus placing massive demand on municipalities and taxpayers to fund their pensions.

Pension reform is a necessity for good fiscal health.

Can Furey of “pension envy” fame bring this reform? He is a public employee, also, but so is fellow challenger Tom Brewer. However, Furey just garnered the Torrance Police Officers Association endorsement, and they have $170,000 in PAC money on hand to promote their candidate. No wonder Fury is in flurry to defend current pension obligations.

Despite their financial leverage, California’s public sector unions have endured more losses than wins lately, starting with San Jose and San Diego, where 70% voting majorities endorsed comprehensive pension reforms in 2011-2012. In 2014, Republican Kevin Faulconer won the special election mayoral race in San Diego, as well, despite ten-to-one outside money from union endorsements.

Despite Councilmember Furey’s fury about pension envy, the frustration about unfunded liabilities is not a disease, but rather a symptom of residential outrage, as voters are fed up with city leaders who accommodate present employees and retirees at the cost of current as well as future residents. Crime is up throughout California, and Governor Brown’s realignment has not helped, but a city which spends more money on retired police rather than clear and present law enforcement needs to shift its priorities.

With the most comprehensive turn-around in city leadership coming to pass in the city’s history, Torrance needs representatives who will not just discuss but enact and enforce comprehensive pension reforms, respecting the needs of current and future retirees, while also ensuring that the bulk of city funding funds city needs, not over-generous pension and benefits guaranteed in lucrative contracts signed by temporal city leaders into place without keen foresight or deep regard for foreseeable economic challenges.

Torrance faces a crumbling infrastructure, including potholes and rising need for parks and recreations restoration. Resident's tax money should go toward renewing and revamping the city’s public works, which serve all residents, rather than exclusively sustaining pension obligations for employees no longer working for the city.

Arthur Christopher Schaper is a teacher-turned-writer on topics both timeless and timely; political, cultural, and eternal. A life-long Southern California resident, Arthur currently lives in Torrance.

Twitter -- @ArthurCSchaper
https://www.facebook.com/arthurchristopher.schaper
arthurschaper@hotmail.com
aschaper1.blogspot.com
asheisministries.blogspot.com
waxmanwatch.blogspot.com

Posted by John May
April 4, 2014

At first glance, it’s easy to like Common Core.  For one thing, it is sponsored by an American hero, Bill Gates, whose foundation has donated over $400 million to pay academic researchers and social scientists to undertake studies and design programs to enable our schools to turn out graduates with upgraded skills in English, math and science. That seems ok.  And how can you not love Bill Gates? Secondly, the President of the USA is a major booster, having directed hundreds of millions of grant money to induce 90% of the states to join Common Core. So far, six states have declined.

There seems to be a widespread belief that American grade school and high school students compare poorly with an embarrassingly large number of other countries. Student achievement scores can be influenced by population mix and teachers’ labor unions, but a third source might be the education system itself. In response to that challenge, a selection of education experts have devised a program which would unify all of the school systems into one centrally managed structure. We will have, in effect, one board of education for the country instead of one for each of the fifty states.

There are lots of details in the complex program and plenty of substance for debates to come such as how to encourage “critical thinking,” and teachers of 44 states are believed to be preparing for the new regimen. The hierarchy of the national system will be empowered to decree what capabilities students should have, what study materials are acceptable and what test regimens will be applied. One notable feature is the creation of a national database to accumulate evaluation data on each student, each year. Student metadata, if you will. The totality of the program resembles that of Obama Care, in that both are complex structures of imposed rules which can be understood only after having lived with them.  

Growing curiosity about Common Core has begun to create a groundswell of concern regarding our Constitution’s main purpose: containing governmental power by dividing it among three branches and defining the responsibilities of each branch, in hope of reducing the potential for oppression. So how does Common Core threaten freedom?

The primary violation is that the federal government has no mandate or even authority to usurp the most important of state government functions, that being education. Fifty independent state systems make possible a diversified search for good educational results. The tendency of some humans to prefer collectivized, controlled programs and to dislike diversification expresses itself politically in the present confrontation. Two offshoots within the educational diversity we enjoy today are charter schools and home schooling, both of which have been producing good results. But they are anathema to the entrenched interests of the US Department of Education, which provides financial support for those who cooperate, and teacher unions which are threatened with erosion of their captive market and their political influence.     

The movement to collectivize education comes on the heels of the control of medical care and medical insurance. Both are highly complex structures of imposed rules which can be understood only after having lived with them.

Posted By Arthur Christopher Schaper
Feb. 27th, 2014

Last month, a Los Angeles jury found State Senator Roderick Wright (D-Inglewood) guilty of eight counts of felony voter fraud and perjury.

In 2010, LA prosecutors had sought an indictment against Wright because he did not live at the address listed on his voter registration. State law requires that every state legislator live in the district that he/she represents. Because of the false address on his registration, he committed perjury and voted fraudulently in five elections.

Residency requirements are a serious matter in California, specifically Los Angeles politics. An LA City Councilman faced similar charges, and the LA County District Attorney investigated residency accusations against a Hermosa Beach city councilmember.

So, Wright has been found in the wrong, declared guilty of voter fraud by a jury of his peers, and awaits sentencing. Wright's legal team has vowed to file an appeal, yet Wright at this time remains a convicted felon.

To add insult to indictment and conviction, Wright attempted to introduce a bill which would reduce non-violent felonies to misdemeanors, two days after he was convicted of eight felony counts himself! Even though the convicted state senator claimed that he did not introduce the bill to save himself the humiliation of being barred from pursuing elected office in the past, the legislation would have indeed softened the blow of his eight felony counts to misdemeanors. Wright's outrageous move did not escape State Senate President Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), and Wright pulled his bill. "Wrong author, wrong time," shared Steinberg's spokesman.

Of course, Steinberg's disapproval does not mean that the Democratic Supermajority will not consider the bill at a later time. What's more disturbing, Steinberg has done nothing to have convicted felon Roderick Write expelled from the state senate. As of now, only three Republican lawmakers have called on the upper chamber to move for Wright's expulsion, as well as independent candidate for Secretary of State David Schnurr.

While Steinberg has asserted that since an appeal will render a final determination, the state senate will wait before proceeding. The state senate President has even justified leaving Wright on committee assignments.  Is this the proper precedent for handling felonious legislators?

In 1994, state senator Frank Hill (R-Whittier) was convicted of non-violent felonies (soliciting a bribe from an undercover agent). Hill stopped voting on bills and stepped down from his committee assignments after his conviction.  After that, the state senate government committee voted 4-0 to expel him after the guilty verdict. Why is the state senate stalling this time?

The San Francisco Chronicle, the Los Angeles Daily News (whose owner includes the Daily Breeze), and the Inland Empire’s Press-Enterprise Editorial Boards have all called for Wright’s resignation or expulsion from the state senate.

And who has not?  State senator Ted Lieu (D-Torrance), who has recently announced his candidacy for the Congressional seat opened up following Congressman Henry Waxman’s decision to retire from Congress.  Senator Lieu has a remarkable legislative record for protecting bears from hunting dogs, preventing adolescents from using tanning salons, and microchipping pets. He attempted triple the state’s licensing fee, has sided with public sector unions, even voted against the state senate bill which would expedite the termination of teachers guilt of moral turpitude against their students.

And now Lieu has said nothing about his convicted felon colleague Roderick Wright. After contacting his Sacramento office, Lieu’s office has confirmed that he issued no press released. Lieu is wrong to say nothing about Wright, and he should the right the wrong of his silence by joining the editorial boards of statewide newspapers and the Republicans in his caucus to demand that Senator Wright resign from office or move to expel him through committee resolution.

Contact State Senator Lieu’s office, and tell him to stop being silent. Demand that he demand the resignation or expulsion of convicted felon Roderick Wright from the California State Senate.

Capitol Office
State Capitol, Room 4061
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4028
Fax: (916) 651-4928

District Office
2512 Artesia Blvd., #320
Redondo Beach, CA 90278-3279
Phone: (310) 318-6994
Fax: (310) 318-6733


Arthur Christopher Schaper is a teacher-turned-writer on topics both timeless and timely; political, cultural, and eternal. A life-long Southern California resident, Arthur currently lives in Torrance.

Twitter -- @ArthurCSchaper
https://www.facebook.com/arthurchristopher.schaper
arthurschaper@hotmail.com
aschaper1.blogspot.com
asheisministries.blogspot.com
waxmanwatch.blogspot.com

Palos Verdes Estates Councilmember George Bird, a registered Republican, and an elected Republican in a Republican stronghold, opted to endorse a Democrat for the state Assembly in 2012, despite the strong credentials of the Republican candidate, and the unprecedented severity (and deleterious consequences) of the 2012 election.

In the Friday, February 14 edition of the Daily Breeze, Bird's letter was published regarding Assemblyman Muratsuchi's decision to run for reelection instead of seeking higher office this year:

Reward Muratsuchi for not seeking a higher office

Re: “Muratsuchi says he’ll run for re-election” (Feb. 7):

How refreshing to see a member of the Assembly choose to stay and continue to serve those who elected him instead of jumping at the first opportunity to run for the state Senate.

There is nothing refreshing, let alone remarkable or significant, about a politician choosing to run for reelection. How is this refreshing, again? Such rhetoric defies definition, requires explanation.

Al Muratsuchi has placed the citizens of the 66th Assembly District before his self-interest by not running for the next office. Al Muratsuchi has well served the interest of the 66th District during his freshman year. The experience he gained will serve him well during his next term.

How did Assemblyman Muratsuchi serve his constituents by signing onto legislation which would permit illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses, a measure which violates the United States' immigration laws, as well as the United States Constitution?

Muratsuchi was not serving the South Bay business community by agreeing to a minimum wage increase, which will only force out entry level workers, including young, minority employees seeking to enter the job market, especially during these difficult economic times.

Local leaders have criticized Muratsuchi's reticence to vote "Yea" or "Nay" on a number of bills. Not much integrity there. He sponsored an aerospace forum, which very few businesses attended. Not much leadership there, either. He waffled on the minimum wage increase by asking for the legislature to remove language tying increases to the rate of inflation. Still, his support for the bill hurt California’s small businesses.

And what leadership has Muratsuchi demonstrated on comprehensive pension reform, or tax reform, or the reduction in regulations?

Muratsuchi also supported AB 1266, which will permit students of decided gender (transgender students) to enter public school bathrooms with other students. This unseemly law motivated prompted initiative for repeal this November.

The constituents of our district recognize that the personal integrity of the candidate and his demonstrated ethics are more important than whether he or she is a Republican or a Democrat. Let’s elect good people, not political opportunists.

With all due respect, Muratsuchi had indeed shown some interest in seeking higher office. Even though the Los Angeles Times and later the Daily Breeze covered for the Democratic lawmaker, there is no hiding the fact that Muratuschi was looking for any opportunity not to run for reelection in a district with a rising Republican resurgence, in which the Democratic brand has been tarnished by a tax-and-spend extreme progressive supermajority in Sacramento.

Bravo to an individual who recognizes that we elected him to do a job and we don’t expect him to always be looking for his next higher political office.

Muratsuchi deserves no bows, Bravos, or applause for warming a seat, paid for by public sector unions.

If we ignore the self-interest of Muratsuchi, we certainly cannot ignore Mr. Bird’s fawning. Is he looking for favors from the Assemblyman?

Now more than ever, Constitutional conservatives, respect for the limited government and fiscal discipline, and most importantly the proper domains of the state regarding the identity of students an their liberty to learn free from social engineering, are values worth fighting for. Muratsuchi does not fight for these values.

Let’s reward the lack of self-interest and the lack of self-promoting by someone who puts us before him, by re-electing Al Muratsuchi to the Assembly.

Once again, there is nothing commendable about a candidate choosing to run for reelection for his current office instead of seeking higher office. This kind of compliment is akin to thanking people for obeying the law, or congratulating people for getting dressed before they leave their homes for work.

— George Bird, Palos Verdes Estates

The voters in Palos Verdes Estates should ask their Councilman why he continues to support a politician whose values clash, rather than complement, the values of the South Bay, particularly registered voters in the Palos Verdes Peninsula.

I emailed Mr. Bird the following:

As a registered Republican in the South Bay, why did you endorse Democrat Muratsuchi for election in 2012, and reelection in 2014?

David Hadley has announced and mounted a sizable campaign to represent the 66th Assembly District.

Your letter gave the impression that you are seeking a higher office with Muratsuchi's help.

Please explain your insistence on supporting a progressive Democrat who had advertised himself as a moderate, especially since you are a registered Republican.

Bird certainly owes his constituents an explanation for his flighty reasons for supporting Assemblyman Muratsuchi's reelection.

Arthur Christopher Schaper is a teacher-turned-writer on topics both timeless and timely; political, cultural, and eternal. A life-long Southern California resident, Arthur currently lives in Torrance.

Twitter -- @ArthurCSchaper
https://www.facebook.com/arthurchristopher.schaper
arthurschaper@hotmail.com
aschaper1.blogspot.com
asheisministries.blogspot.com
waxmanwatch.blogspot.com

Posted by John May
Oct. 29th, 2013

Why, you may ask, would anyone want to read about the national debt?  For one thing, the numbers are too big to understand.  What for example is a trillion? (I’m pretty sure it’s a million million, with twelve zeroes.)  Most articles on the national debt focus on the $17 trillion US Treasury debt and ignore the present value of promised benefits of Social Security, Medicare and Federal employee retirement costs, for a total of $86 trillion.

One way to grasp the heft of that number is to compare it to the entire American economy. The total of every transaction done in America in a year is around $16 trillion, so that the US liability of $86 trillion is five times the size of the economy.  There are about 155 million people employed, which works out to a burden of over a half million dollars for each worker.

The probability is zero that that the repayment money will be taxed away from earners of income and owners of assets.  Taxation will probably be the source of less than half of the debt; the major portion will be dealt with by cheapening the dollar through an acceleration of inflation. This is a predictable pattern of human behavior because it enables spending now in return for a pretense of repayment later, similar to borrowing plums and repaying with prunes.  One familiar observation is that  at the time of the Civil War, you could buy a hand made suit of men’s clothing in New York City once of gold, then $25,  and now, a century later, you still can, with gold at $1300. The price of suits did not change…only the dollar did.

In the table below, see the pattern of receipts as compared with federal spending;

Year    Receipts(Portion of GDP)    Expenditures (Portion of GDP)
1960    18%                                    18%
1970    18%                                    20%
1980    19%                                    22%
1990    19%                                    23%
2000    21%                                    19%
2009    16%                                    26%
2010    17%                                    27%

Source: justfacts.com

Now, see where YOUR tax dollars have been going.

                                Portion of Total Federal Spending (years)
Category                1960    1970    1980    1990    2000    2010
Social Spending     23%    35%      47%    45%     56%     61%
National Defense    56%    44%      28%    27%     20%     22%
General Gov't. &
Debt Service          14%     12%      16%     21%     18%    11%
Economic Affairs
& Infrastructure       7%       9%      8%        5%        6%    4%
Public Order &
Safety                    0%        0%     1%        1%        1%    2%

Source: justfacts.com

John May spent the first half of his life in New York and the other half in California. He has worked in the finance industry for over 50 years as an analyst on Wall Street, pension fund manager, investment adviser and speechwriter.

He began writing for fun and performing at open mics in Long Beach, California in 2007. Favorite topics for the poet, known locally as “Jack,” include romance, war, economics, politics, philosophy and comedy.

Jack and wife Peggy have been married for over 50 years; they have two children, Jacqueline and John, who have a total of five more