SACRAMENTO – Senate Republican Leader Dennis Hollingsworth (R – Murrieta), talks about how Democrats’ insistence that tax increases be part of the budget deal is discouraging job growth, and prolonging the recession in this week’s Senate Republican Radio Address.

Links to audio versions of the address, and a transcript, are included below:

English Version: http://cssrc.us/audio/100716_SenRepAdd.mp3
Spanish Version: http://cssrc.us/audio/100716_SenRepAdd_esp.mp3

TRANSCRIPT:

Yet another week has gone by without passing a balanced budget for California. That’s because rather than reducing spending to match what we have, the Legislature’s Democrat majority insists on including billions of dollars of job killing tax increases to close the state budget gap.

Now, just 18 months ago Californians were saddled with the largest tax increase in history. As republicans predicted, that huge tax increase stifled economic growth and resulted in further job layoffs in private businesses.

And the economic news keeps getting worse. A survey this week from the National Federation of Independent Business shows small business owners aren’t planning to hire new employees or buy new equipment because of the threat of further taxes and more government regulation. Now, how could even higher taxes possibly be a good idea for a budget plan?

Small businesses are California’s economic engine and should be driving the economic recovery.

Instead, because Democrats insist on job-killing tax increases, California’s unemployment rate is nearly 30 percent higher than the national average.

The right state budget must reduce spending, be balanced with no new taxes, and most important of all, it must encourage private-sector job creation.

I am Senate Republican Leader Dennis Hollingsworth: Thank you for listening.

Red Alert Update

SB 1178 Passes Senate!

Victory for REALTORS® and Their Clients!

SB 1178 was just approved by the Senate, over lender opposition, with a vote of 30 to 4.

Thank you to the over 5,000 REALTORS® who made a difference by contacting their senator to support the bill! For more information on the vote, see the list below.

C.A.R. is sponsoring SB 1178 (Corbett) to extend anti-deficiency protections to homeowners who have refinanced “purchase money” loans and are now facing foreclosure. Most homeowners didn’t even know that when they refinanced they lost their legal protections, and now may be personally liable for the difference between the value of the foreclosed property and the amount owed to the lender.

Here is how senators voted today.

“Yes” votes: Aanestad, Alquist, Ashburn, Cedillo, Cogdill, Corbett (author), Correa, DeSaulnier, Ducheny, Florez, Hancock, Hollingsworth, Huff, Kehoe, Leno, Liu, Lownenthal, Negrete McLeod, Oropeza, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Romero, Runner, Simitian, Steinberg, Wolk, Wright, Wyland and Yee.

“No” votes: Calderon, Denham, Strickland and Walters.

Not voting: Cox, Dutton, and Harman.

Absent (not in Sacramento that day due to health reasons): Wiggins.

Thank you to everyone who made a call to their senator. Facing lender opposition, many of those who ultimately voted for the bill, may not have done so if they hadn’t received so many calls from REALTORS®.

Call Your State Senator Today

C.A.R. is sponsoring SB 1178 (Corbett) to extend anti-deficiency protection to homeowners who had refinanced from “purchase money” loans and are now facing foreclosure. C.A.R. is sponsoring SB 1178 because most homeowners don’t know that when they refinanced from their original loan they lost their legal protections and now may be personally liable for the difference between the value of the foreclosed property and the amount owed to the lender. SB 1178 will be voted on soon by the entire Senate.

California law has protected borrowers from so-called “deficiency” liability on their home mortgages since the 1930s, but the evolution of mortgage finance requires that the statute be updated.

Current law says that if a homeowner defaults on a mortgage used to purchase his or her home, the homeowner’s liability on the mortgage is limited to the property
itself. The law has worked well since the 1930s to protect borrowers, ensure the quality of loan underwriting and allow borrowers brought down by financial crisis to get back on their feet.

SB 1178 is consistent with the intent of the original law and simply updates it for modern times. Current law was intended to ensure that if someone lost their home to foreclosure, they wouldn’t be liable for additional payment. Since the law was passed over 70 years ago, homeowners refinancing from the original loan to lower their interest rate has become a commonplace. The 1930s legislature didn’t anticipate how mortgages would change over time.

As things stand today, lenders could pursue families to collect this “debt” years down the road. Lenders have up to ten years to collect on the additional debt after a judgment has been
entered on the foreclosure. Years after a family has lost their home, they could find themselves in even more financial trouble. Lenders could even sell these accounts to aggressive collection agencies or even bundle them into securities. The end result would be banks who didn’t lend responsibly in the first place coming after families for even more money that they don’t have.

C.A.R. is Sponsoring SB 1178 because:

·
SB 1178 is fair. Home buyers, and lenders, entered into the purchase with the idea that the mortgage would be non-recourse debt, and that the lender would look to the security (the house) itself to make good on the debt if the borrower cannot.  mIt meets the legitimate expectation of the borrowers, who have no idea that they are losing this protection by a refinance. Home owners didn’t know that their refinance exposed them to personal liability, and new tax liability, on the note. It would be unfair to allow a lender, or someone that has purchased a note from a lender, to pursue the borrower beyond the value of the agreed upon security.

·     SB 1178 is consistent with the intent of the original law and simply updates it for modern times. Current law was intended to ensure that if someone lost their home to foreclosure, they wouldn’t be liable for additional payment. Since the law was passed over 70 years ago, homeowners refinancing from the original loan to lower their interest rate has become a commonplace. The 1930s legislature didn’t anticipate how mortgages would change over time.

·     Lenders could pursue families to collect this “deficiency debt” years down the road. Under current law, lenders have up to ten years to collect on the additional debt after a judgment has been entered on the foreclosure. Years after a family has lost their home, they could find themselves in even more financial trouble. Lenders could even sell these accounts to aggressive collection agencies or even bundle them into securities. The end result would be banks who didn’t lend responsibly in the first place coming after families for even more money that they don’t have.

·     SB 1178 does NOT apply to “cash-out” refinances, unless the money was used to improve the home and it doesn’t apply to HELOCs.

Be part of C.A.R.’s Government Affairs Team and help pass SB 1178. Call your state Senator TODAY and urge him or her to vote “YES” on SB 1178.

Real world effects:

In 2006, Mary and her spouse have a nice median priced home and a $500,000 mortgage.  Because it is a “purchase money” mortgage, if she defaults or walks away from the house, the lender’s only option is to take the house by foreclosure.

In 2006, Mary decides to refinance the house because interest rates have become so much more attractive.  They refinance their original “purchase money” mortgage, and begin paying on their new $500,000 mortgage. Nothing fancy, no new debt, no cash out, no consumer spending built into the loan – just a lower interest rate. Unbeknownst to Mary, and with no notice from the lender, she has lost the anti-deficiency protection that applied to the original purchase money note. Now, if she loses her job and defaults on the loan, the lender can sue her personally and not only foreclose on the house, but also get a judgment against her for the difference.

In 2009, Mary’s house is “upside down” and only worth half of what it was in 2006 – so, she could lose her house, and still owe the lender more than her original equity. Even worse, the lender can hound her for that liability for the next 10 years whenever she gets a new job or acquires any additional asset. Call Senator Dennis Hollingsworth today at: 1-800-672-3135, pin # 196519886 and
urge him to vote yes on SB1178.

The Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors is pleased to announce that Senate Minority Leader Dennis Hollingsworth (R-Murrieta) will be our honored guest at a June 18th luncheon. Senator Hollingsworth has been a champion of legislation to benefit Southwest California during his tenure as as Assemblyman and more recently as Senator. Over the years he has also carried several bills on behalf of Realtors® and for property rights issues.

Senator Hollingsworth has been a staunch anti-tax crusader, a position that elevated him to his current role as Minority Leader when his predecessor got a little too chummy with the tax-and-spend majority in Sacramento. As presented in numerous posts to this site, Hollingsworth has continued to rail against tax increases and the spending abuses that plague our state. Hollingsworth has led the Republican Caucus in advocating reduced spending and smaller government at a time when state government has expanded at a prodigious rate.

On a personal note, I have also credited Hollingsworth with helping Gov. Arnold find his balls late last year at a time when all seemed lost. Hollingsworth, who shares an affinity for cowboy boots and stogies with the Gov., was often spotted with Arnie in the Governors ’smoking tent’ on the back lawn of the Capitol. It was during this time that Arnold experienced a brief resurgence of the vigor and focus that gave so many hope when he first ascended to the office.

As a former President of the Riverside County Farm Bureau, Hollingsworth has brought a unique knowledge and perspective to his position. He understands the need for conservation and the preservation of property rights. But he also understands the need to balance those needs with infrastructure requirements and job creation. He has lobbied the federal government on the Endangered Species Act and specifically, de-listing the Delta Smelt – the wee beastie that has wrought havoc on our state water supply. He has also led several efforts on behalf of Southwest County as well as the entire state, for more local control of funds, projects and power.

Senator Hollingsworth has also just been confirmed as the Keynote address during CAR’s Legislative Day on June 9th. Delegates from SRCAR and other associations will be meeting privately with the Senator in the afternoon. Attendance at our June 18th event will be limited to those members of our Realtor Action Fund Champions who have invested the ‘True Cost of Doing Business’ prior to June 1, 2010. If you would like to find out more about this event and how to get your name on the guest list for this exclusive opportunity to chat with our Senate Minority Leader, please contact me at GAD@SRCAR.org.

Well, the litany of grievances was constrained to 3 hours but most panelists indicated they could go on for days about the negative shift in California’s business climate over the past decade.

Solutions? Not many. While several referred to the growing anger and activism of business owners, the prevailing majority legislative climate precludes any real progress unless or until people get really fed up. They recommended a cessation of new regulations, at least until we’ve figured out what the current regulations say. They cautioned our Legislators that California doesn’t necessarily have to take the lead in everything – especially in job-killer legislation and extreme and excessive environmental regulation. They pleaded for no new taxes – against either businesses or individuals. In fact there was some agreement on eliminating personal income taxes and reducing sales tax applied across a broader base including services as a way to stabilize state revenue while reducing the overall tax burden.

Using Texas as a model, they cited the lack of personal income tax and a part-time legislature which has led to a stable housing market and an expanding business climate. Some businesses relocating to Texas have claimed up to 50% reductions in business costs, regulatory burden, more affordable employee housing and a more cooperative and friendly state structure. It’s all about the ROI and California just doesn’t offer that incentive anymore. We have the talent and the innovators. 3 of every 5 patents issued in this country still originate in California. We are still the drivers of the nation’s economy and business – but we are fast losing that edge and doing nothing about it, or maybe even exacerbating it.

Finally, at the risk of creating yet another state level bureaucracy, Vranich suggested a Business Protection Agency. To be run by business people who have actually run businesses and met payrolls and understand the impacts and unintended consequences of the legislation and regulation that routinely plops in steaming mounds from the bowels of Sacramento. This group would have final say-so on anything that would ultimately impact businesses and would have the power to modify or reject anything that would cost more jobs than it would create.

Will anything be accomplished by this summit? Not likely. But it gave our Legislators a chance to hear directly from those most impacted by the current business climate in our state. But as they said, the people who really need to hear this message (i.e. Democratic Legislators), to understand the impact of their actions, are the ones least likely to listen or to understand what they are hearing. Until people wake up and vote with their wallets, California individuals and businesses will continue to vote with their legs and take their business elsewhere.

L to R: Brian Hawley, Greater Riverside C of C, Roger Ziemer, Southwest California Legislative Council, Mark Knorringa, Riverside County Building Industry

Panelists repeatedly pointed to onerous regulations and taxes as the primary factors impacting businesses in the (formerly) Golden State. It was referred to as the ‘circle of insanity’ where revenues are down so businesses get taxed and regulated more so they leave the state which leads to reduced revenues so businesses get taxed… well, you understand. They cautioned Legislators – “when someone is drowning you throw them a life preserver, not an anchor.”

Mark Knorringa, Riverside County Building Industry Association, noted that housing equals jobs. But construction jobs are off 56% from their 2004-2006 peak, a loss of 74,500 jobs and a vast multiplier effect. Excessive regulation of their industry, including onerous California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) regulations and recent California Air Resources Board (CARB) rulings, are like kicking someone when they’re down. ‘They’re just plain mean.’

Virtually every speaker identified problems for their industry resulting from AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which remains former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez’ departing joke on the state. Some have taken to calling this bill the California Economic Destruction Act.

Also mentioned frequently – labor laws including overtime and lunch & break rules which make it difficult to allow flex-time or accommodate employee wishes without running afoul of the law. They also make it more expensive to do business and create compliance and paperwork nightmares. Capricious and changing interpretation of existing regulations also increase cost as formerly compliant businesses now find themselves required to expend thousands or millions of dollars simply to accede to a regulators whim.

Legislative priorities were also addressed with many voicing concerns that critical water and infrastructure requirements are neglected while more frivolous matters are entertained. Major employers like Northrop-Grumman, Hilton, SAIC and Starkist are leaving the state taking thousands of high paying jobs. Hundreds of smaller companies have joined the exodus while no major employer is locating here.

We have driven all but 2 or 3 of the states refineries out. AB32 likely signals the end for those remaining. This will drive California’s already high fuel costs inevitably higher while increasing our reliance on imported supplies. The lion’s share of these supplies come from foreign sources not necessarily friendly to our country as well as countries which could care less about their carbon footprint or being on the vanguard of environmental regulation.

In other words – by being radically environmental, we are not only killing California jobs but are actually making the situation worse by driving those jobs to the least environmentally aware nations in the world. Given the state water crisis, we are also currently in danger of becoming a net importer of food, just as we already have become net importers of oil and manufactured goods. It wasn’t always so.

Relocation consultant Joseph Vranich likened the situation in Sacramento to ‘Alice in Wonderland’. Money falls down a big hole, what you see may not be real and what you hear you can’t believe. He posited the ‘top ten’ reasons he has gleaned from relocating clients as to why they are leaving the state:

10. Unfair taxes – California ranks #48 in the country for tax fairness.

9.  Our cities are among the most expensive to do business in.

8.  Labor – our performance is the worst while our costs are among the highest.

7.  Legal treatment – we rank 44^th in legal fairness to businesses.

6.  Worst regulatory burden of any state – by a significant margin.

5.  Worst customer service – at the state level. Where to go, how to do it, how to comply.

4.  Worst business climate in general – taxes, regulations, costs, housing costs.

3.  Downright unfriendly – again at the state level. Other states beg companies to come – we beg them to go.

2.  Unreasonable state spending – leads to unpredictable behavior and a risky climate for business – not good.

1.  The worst state in the country to do business in – from inside the state or from outside trying to do business inside. Businesses in garden spots like Buffalo and Philadelphia are recovering faster than California right now.

Continued in part 3.

L to R: Miller, Emmerson, Jeffries, Nestande, Hollingsworth

66^th District Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries recently hosted a Legislative Summit on Jobs and Regulations in California. Held in the Riverside County Supervisors Chambers, the dais included Jeffries, 65^th District Assemblyman Bill Emmerson, 64^th District Assemblyman Brian Nestande and 71^st District Assemblyman Jeff Miller along with Senate Republican Leader Dennis Hollingsworth.

During the 3 hour meeting, the Legislators listened much more than they talked as they heard from 3 separate panels of local business leaders and nationally recognized relocation consultant Joseph Vranich.

Of the 10 panelists who testified, Southwest County was well represented by 5 individuals including; Roger Ziemer, Southwest California Legislative Council; Ben Drake, Drake Enterprises, Inc.; Roy Paulson, Paulson Manufacturing Corp; Juergen Wohl, International Rectifier; and Douglas Plazak, Reid & Hellyer.

Industries from agriculture to media, Chambers of Commerce to Building Industry, trucking to manufacturing were present to voice their concerns with current state regulations and make suggestions on what California needs to do to regain a pre-eminent role in our nations economy.

Mark Christiansen, Deputy Director of the Riverside County EDA Workforce Division, started the discussion citing some current statistics for the county including the unemployment rate of 15.1%, up from 14.3% in December. This compares to a national unemployment rate of 9.7%. But these 137,000 unemployed people in Riverside County don’t count the additional 9.3% of the people out of work longer than 26 weeks who are effectively out of the market or the 9.4% part-time or under-employed. If you’re doing the math that means about 33% of our workforce is either unemployed or under-employed. It’s even worse in some central-California regions.

Christiansen also pointed to 73,000 jobs lost just over the past year including 15,500 construction jobs with no rebound in sight yet. When queried, he could point to no ‘hard results’ from the Federal stimulus moneys received by the county, saying that had actually led to ‘layoff aversion’ and re-education programs as well as some youth training to make our younger workforce more employable when things pick up.

Continued in part 2.

Local Legislators Hold Summit on Jobs & Regulations, Part 1
Local Legislators Hold Summit on Jobs & Regulations, Part 2
Local Legislators Hold Summit on Jobs & Regulations, Part 3


Just a couple final comments on the recent Legislative Summit that didn’t make it to print in my newspaper article. Businessman after businessman told stories about specific impacts to their business from California’s over-regulatory climate.

1. A local news paper publisher told how his company could actually hire additional people if they weren’t constrained by overtime and break rules. They have people who would prefer to work flex schedules of 4 ten hour days (including many working mothers with small children) but they can’t accomodate them because anything over 8 hours has to be paid overtime. Reporters on the job, chasing a story, actually have to break up their day by taking (and documenting) the mandatory worktime breaks and lunch requirements. Restaurant owners voiced similar complaints.
2. Another business owner documented a $60,000 up-front cost and a $20,000 ongoing annual cost required to find and tag every hose and pipe fitting and connection in his facility. Each tag must now be monitored monthly with a sniffer and a report must be submitted to some state agency which goes unread. Due to the nature of his business, the fittings have always been monitored daily as leaks could be catastrophic. Now the state has created an additional overhead requirement of the tagging and unnecessary paperwork as an added cost.
3. Another business owner pointed to the capricious nature of code compliance. For seven years the above-ground storage tanks at his facility have been considered in compliance with regulations and the integrity of the tanks monitored daily. A new state inspector came on board and determined that since the tanks were actually in a building they should be classified as ‘underground’ tanks and were subject to a different regulation. Each tank had to be retro-fitted with a built-in sniffer unit at a cost in excess of $80,000 and monthly compliance reporting added another $20,000 per year to the overhead. They were also fined because 2 of the 60 sniffers were installed about 2 inches out of what the inspector considered proper.
4. One business owner documented an additional cost of over $1 million per year to his business for trucking water. He cited this cost as a major consideration in a potential move of his company and its 3,500 California jobs to an off-shore location. His company uses water as part of their manufacturing process, The water is then treated to a point where it cleaner than the water that enters the facility. However, state regulations prohibit them from either using the water for on-site irrigation or to dump it down the sewer system. Instead, they have to contract for 4 tankers trucks a day to come to their facility to pick up the water and truck it four miles down the roadwhere it is then dumped into the sewer system adjacent to a sewage treatment facility.
5. Finally, we have two local hospitals in the Murrieta area that have not been able to expand their facilities due to a mixture of regulation and politics. The two expansion facilities represent an investment of $94 million by Southwest Healthcare Systems. At one facility a new emergency room which would expand the existing facility (built when our population was about 25% of current) from 8 beds to 38 beds. It also includes a womens care facility, birthing center and the areas first neo-natal intensive care unit and surgi-center. This $54 million facility has been ready to open for 14 months yet sits vacant. Why? Repeated violation cited by state inspectors mainly due to overcrowding in the current ER which would be resolved by opening the new facility. However they won’t let them open the new facility until the overcrowding issues are resolved, a classic Catch 22.

Oh – the problems started for the hospital when they held a vote that kept the unions out. Coincidence? Well, it could be. But the state                     regulators (for whom there is no oversight or accountability) are mighty cozy with the California Nurses Association as well as the SEIU. This             issue has not only cost jobs to the region but has resulted in a local healthcare crisis of sorts as well as a threat to birthing mothers and                     newborns who must be driven or flown an hour away to Riverside, the next nearest neo-natal care unit.

In their most recent lunacy, the state did allow the hospital to triage and treat emergency room patients in a huge circus-like tent in the                     parking lot. Immediately adjacent to the $54 million emergency room that sits vacant.

The summit really shined the light on many, many egregious problems within our state that are serving daily to drive higher paying jobs to other states. But until we get rid of the Democratic majority in our legislature, nothing will change. These people are bought and paid for by the major public employee unions, (nurses, teachers, prison workers, seiu). The majority of our Democratic legislators have also never held a real private sector job – they have in one manner or another suckled from the public teat their entire career and know nothing of meeting payroll, running a business, being competitive in a marketplace or anything remotely useful. Until our legislative demographic changes significantly, California will never rise to its full potential again.

If you live in Califnria and continue voting for the same dead-ass hacks, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. Get a clue. They are stangling the life out of our state.

Want to build windmills to generate electrical power? CEQA compliance will add 6 years to the timetable. Want to put solar collectors out in the middle of the Mojave Desert? Sorry, CEQA says it might disrupt animal migration patterns. Want to add another lane to the I-215? Sorry, you need to re-do all the CEQA stuff you already complied with once even though nothing has changed. Want to build a hospital in Temecula? CEQA will keep you hopping from makework to paperwork in no time at all.

Finally some in our state capitol are growing cajones and saying ‘enough is enough’. We need infrastructure, we need dams and roads and disaster relief and we need JOBS. You’ll note with no great surprise that the Sierra Club bemoans this ‘attack on CEQA’ and ‘developers using the recession as an excuse for rollbacks.’ When the Sierra Club gets into the business of helping create jobs in the state, let me know and I’ll start caring about what they say.

SRCAR has sent a letter to Senator Dennis Hollingsworth in SUPPORT of his bill SB X8-56, outlined below.

State’s main environmental law targeted on broad front in Capitol

The Southwest California Legislative Council, with whom SRCAR is an advocacy partner, today adopted the following positions on current/pending legislation:

Support – ACA 30 (Jeffries) To abolish the office of Lieutenant Governor.
Self explanatory – this largely ceremonial position requires salary & staff expenses and the duties could be consolidated with the Secretary of State.

Support – AB 1671 (Jeffries) To prevent the Governor from appointing vacancies on the County Board of Supervisors.
A recent example in Riverside County left us without the ability to pass certain bills at the county level while Sacramento played politics with us. Our local positions should not be state appointed.

Support – AB 1672 (Jeffries) To make the California Air Resources Board an elected rather than appointed body.
The CARB is one of the most egregious examples of the lack of accountability on state boards & commissions with the Chair stating publicly that if she had to worry about being elected she would worry about all the jobs cost by their recommendation – but she’s not so she doesn’t.

Oppose – AB 1594 (Huber) To prohibit construction of the peripheral canal.
An attempt to circumvent the wording and intent of the state water coalition recommendation and the Nov, ballot initiative.

Oppose – AB 518 (Lowenthal) Provides incentives for cities and counties to reduce or eliminate free or subsidized parking.
Would prove particularly costly to outlying areas like Southwest County where 60% of our residents commute and are forced to park either at work or when they go shopping.  Unintended consequence is a reduction in people going to the malls reducing revenue to shopowners and downstream job market.

Oppose – SB 657 (Steinberg) Require retail sellers and manufacturers to implement policies to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from their supply chain.
Legislation already exists prohibiting slavery and human trafficking. To expect your local grocery store or hardware store to be able to track it’s products back to their origin and potentially take action against some foreign source is ludicrous. Besides, doesn’t Darrell Steinberg have anything better to worry about – like our state budget?

Oppose – SB 810 (Leno) Single payer health care system
We are in agreement that the state should be the appropriate body to determine this issue – rather than the federal government, but this bill is not the answer and would only increase the debt load of the state.

Founded in 2004, the Southwest California Legislative Council is a regional advocacy coalition of the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce, Murrieta Chamber of Commerce, Lake Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce and the Wildomar Chamber of Commerce. Its mission is to provide a basis for the four chambers of commerce to act on local, state and federal legislative issues to secure a favorable and profitable business climate for our region.

Yesterday the Senate Budget Committee, in its wisdom, decided not to bring up independent contractor withholding for a vote at its meeting. For the time being, we’ve won, but Steinberg is expected to push it again later in the year as the budget fight heats up.

For those members concerned about their $49 investment in political survival, you might ask them if they would rather have paid the extra 3% ($90 out of pocket on a $3,000 commission). This is what the $49 does – not travel for Directors, not salaries for lobbyists and not to pay for Chief Economist Lawrence Yun.

“Our budget problems in California are a symptom of the problems in California created by years of over-regulation and years and years of bills going through this house and the other house across the other side of this building that destroy jobs.” Senate Minority Leader Dennis Hollingsworth (R – Murrieta)

Anybody who has witnessed the madhouse that our state legislature becomes at the end of session or during cross-over, will have a heightened appreciation for the latest call to action from Senate Hollingsworth. In a speech before the Senate last week, Hollingsworth said that the goal of the Legislature should be ‘to restore California’s job climate and economy’ and asked Legislators to ask themselves 5 questions before every bill they vote on.

1. Does this legislation include an analysis that proves that the bill actually improves the economic conditions in California?
2. Does this legislation improve the employment opportunities for struggling Californians impacted by this recession and state government-imposed burdens?
3. Does the legislation or the regulation make compliance easier for businesses to create jobs, or make it tougher to create jobs?
4. Does the legislation or the regulation make California a more attractive place to live and do business?
5. Does the legislation or the regulation encourage investment in jobs at all levels of the employment scale?

Sounds simple enough but given the performance of our Legislature over the past several years (decades), it’s no easy task.

Seems there’s always somebody hell-bent on doing just the opposite, giving in to every special interest, public union, green, enviro, fringe element to further alienate jobs, housing and economic growth. Tell me that’s not so?

If you have the fortitude to watch the final 2 days of this session, you’ll see Legislators voting on literally hundreds of bills, most of them totally worthless and self-serving (the bills &/or the Legislators). They’ll do this without having read the bills, without a moments debate and with no thought to the costs or consequences of their votes. I’d venture 80% of the bills will be passed on a straight party line vote and neither you nor they will have the slightest idea what they just voted on.

Senator Hollingsworth’s goals are right in line with the California Chamber of Commerce’s ‘Agenda for Economic Recovery’, as detailed in this article. Now if we could only find a few Democrats in Sacramento who have actually held private sector jobs and understood the economy we might have a shot at accomplishing what needs to be done.

Awwww, that’s just silly talk. What am I thinking? If you need any more proof, just look at what they’re doing to the water bills in the face of that imminent crisis.  Well, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.

The Times also had some carefully parsed words for our own Senator Hollingsworth. While they were careful to maintain their liberally correct stance by pointing out how conservative Hollingsworth is and what an unusual alliance he has formed both with the Governor and his Chief of Staff, they did admit that Hollingsworth is usually the first to arrive at meetings and the last to leave and has been known to enjoy a stogie with the Gov.

I’m guessing maybe Senator Hollingsworth had something to do with the Governor finding his balls again during this process. After the Teachers Association, the Prison Guards Union and the SEIU deftly removed them and hid them back in 2005, the Gov has been a shadow of the man we thought we elected to replace the Grey Man. However, Arnie has been waving the old saber around again, he  actually vetoed numerous line items including many that are near and dear to the hearts of liberals, and though the budget has numerous gimmicks and smoke shrouded fixes, it DOES NOT contain any new taxes.

Is it merely coincidence he has been spending more time with Hollingsworth? I think not. My guess is Dennis has spent time walking the Governor down memory lane back to the days when he was popular, when people had high expectations of him, when he was a man of stature and substance, in short, back to when he was a Republican.

California’s budget process as sausage-making

Coincidence or not, I’d like to thank the Senator for helping Arnie find his balls again and for keeping the truculent and timid Republicans in line this time around. With more Hollingsworth’s and fewer Adams’ and Maldonado’s, we might actually get this state running again.

You can also read the entire budget summary here together with 9 pages of the Gov’s line item vetoes.

What They Are Saying…
The Job Is Not Done

Steinberg: We May Not Be Done Cutting Yet
“Still more cutting loomed. ‘Frankly, we may not be done (cutting) yet,’ Senate Leader Darrell Steinberg said after the agreement was reached. He said the state has confronted a $60 billion cumulative shortfall since Jan. 1.”
Anthony York, “Governor, Legislative Leaders Agree On Pain-Filled Budget,” Capitol Weekly, 7/20/09

Hollingsworth: This is Not An End All Be All Budget
“Still, legislative leaders wondered whether California’s fiscal troubles are over. … Added Senate Republican leader Dennis Hollingsworth, R-Murrieta: ‘This isn’t a be-all and end-all. It’s simply a solution to what we face today. We hope it lasts.’”
Peter Hecht and Steve Wiegand, “Lawmakers Send Budget To Schwarzenegger,” Sacramento Bee, 7/25/09

Governor: We Are Not Finished
“Schwarzenegger pushed for numerous changes to ‘business as usual’ in state government – from eliminating various commissions to killing automatic cost-of-living increases in welfare grants – as part of the deal to close a $26.3 billion shortfall. ‘Of course, it’s a never-ending process, so we should not think we’re finished with it, and we should continue reforming,’ Schwarzenegger said in a telephone interview Wednesday.”
Jim Sanders, “Schwarzenegger Claims Progress On Reform,” Sacramento Bee, 7/23/09

Sen. Feinstein: California Has A Cost-Of-Doing-Business Problem
“[California Senator Dianne] Feinstein said Gov. Schwarzenegger and the California Congressional delegation are examining the possible use of federal stimulus money or changes in state labor regulations to help save the plant and its 4,500 jobs and the thousands more that would be indirectly affected. … ‘But one of the things California has to come to grips with, is that the competition here is Kentucky and Mississppi, and you have this cost-of-doing-business problem,’ Feinstein said. ‘That’s a big problem.’”
Carolyn Lochhead, “Feinstein: High Costs In California May Be To Blame,” San Francisco Chronicle, 7/23/09

California Among Worst Business Climate In The Nation
“The state’s periodic social and economic upheavals have always generated that kind of media attention, something along the lines of ‘tarnish on the Golden State.’ But the current spate has an even edgier tone, suggesting that this time, it’s worse and at least semi-permanent. One example is California journalist and futurist Joel Kotkin, writing in Forbes magazine: ‘But the fundamental problem remains. California’s economy – once wondrously diverse with aerospace, high-tech, agriculture and international trade – has run aground. Burdened by taxes and ever-growing regulation, the state is routinely rated by executives as having among the worst business climates in the nation. No surprise, then, that California’s jobs engine has sputtered, and it may be heading toward 15 percent unemployment.’”
Dan Walters, “Out-of-States Gleefully Delve Into California’s Woes,” Sacramento Bee, 7/15/09

Additional Reforms Are Needed
“Against all odds, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Legislature last week agreed on a revised budget that will end the state’s cash crisis, stave off insolvency and give the state some breathing room to regroup, then tackle the problem again in a few months. If the state’s finances were a hospital patient, they would be out of intensive care, in critical but stable condition, and still in need of life-saving surgery. The question now, for the entire state and not just its political class, is what kind of surgery will lead to the strongest long-term recovery.”
Editorial, “This State Budget Is Just The Beginning,” Sacramento Bee, 7/26/09

In addition to board members representing the interests of 4 local chambers of commerce and a broad spectrum of local businesses, the SCLC also welcomes guests to our monthly meetings that typically include representatives of  Economic Development agencies, our cities, the building industry, the League of Cities and, of course, our representatives at the county, state and federal level,. The meetings are an opportunity for us to evaluate and take positions on legislation, to communicate this directly to our representatives, and to allow them to update us on what our  legislators are up to.

At our most recent meeting on 7/20, our representative from Representative Mary Bono-Mack’s office provided us with a packet of information detailing the Representatives recent activities in DC. Among the items addressed were her views on the current healthcare debate, a revisit of the outdated subsidies for ethanol production (another ‘GREEN’ initiative that wasn’t thought through to it’s logical conclusion), a call to address substance abuse, another call to the House Energy Committee to hold a hearing on the role of technology in giving voice to those silenced by repressive governments (ala Twitter and the recent Iran election), and a message encouraging Interior Secretary Salazar to ‘fast-track’ solar energy development on western lands. All worthwhile positions – even though most represent positions of interest rather than actual accomplishment.

Conspicuous by it’s absence was a Bono-Mac statement on why she was the only Republican on the House Energy Committee to vote for the horrendous bill that has come to be known as the ‘Cap & Trade’ Bill or  the Waxman-Markey energy bill. Nor was there an explanation of why she was one of only a few Republicans to vote for it’s passage in the House when Republicans (including her husband Representative Connie Mack) and more than a few Democrats voted against it.

You may recall my rant following Realtor Hill visits in DC when we encouraged Bono-Mack (who has heretofore shown considerable support for Realtors and property rights) to  vote against this bill based on the extremely onerous ‘energy-star’ component which would have had an extremely deleterious impact on housing. She was the lone Republican vote to pass this bill out of committee a scant 2 days after our visit. Her excuse at the time – well, while the 685 page bill contained many flaws, she believed it deserved a full hearing and an opportunity to ‘fix’ it.

Well, the bill didn’t get ‘fixed’. instead they added another 400 +/- pages of crappola that nobody read and passed this POS out of the House and onto the Senate. In spite of the lack of her desired ‘fixes’, Bono-Mack joined just a smattering of other Republicans to help garner passage of this landmark climate bill authored by homely Henry Waxman. Even Time Magazine columnist and Obama sycophant Joe Klein pointed out in a recent article that ‘this bill is an excellent candidate for euthanasia. It is a demonstration of all thats wrong with the legislative process in latter day America.’ Couldn’t have said it better myself.

After being taken to task by constituents on FaceBook pages for several days after her vote, Bono-Mack posted a tepid response that she was only representing the wishes of her constituency in voting to expand the use of solar and wind power in her district. Interesting that most of her constituents didn’t see it that way. Following the failure to include information on this vote to the SCLC, her representative promised to email us all a letter wherein Bono-mack would explain all. I’m eagerly awaiting that.

Most readers know I’m not a big fan of Darrell Issa – but I will be the first to tell you that Issa has voted against the rush-rush stimulus bills starting last year, and has been consistent and vocal in his opposition to the rapid expansion of government we have seen under the Obama regime. On the other hand – if you look at the voting record, Bono-Mack has voted opposite Issa and supported every stimulus and bail-out that’s been proposed so far, and has capped off this losing streak by joining Democrats to support the Waxman-Markey energy bill. Perhaps it’s time Bono-mack reconsidered her party affiliation. Or if the rigors of maintaining a bi-coastal legislative marriage is proving too taxing, she should consider some alternative form of public service.

I happen to know a Republican with exceptional conservative credentials who currently serves as Minority Leader of the California Senate. Dennis Hollingsworth will be termed out of his California service next year, which would position him for  run at this seat in much the same district he has represented so ably at the state level. Being the gentleman and party stalwart he has been, Hollingsworth would be unlikely to run against a sitting Republican but either he should consider it, or Bono-Mack should consider giving up the seat she inherited following the untimely death of Sonny Bono.

Of course that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.