The first draft of the Federal regulations for the "Real ID" law does not prohibit illegal aliens from having drivers licenses. Of course, to get a drivers license, you will need credible identification, not the $25 phony matricula consular cards anyone can get from the Mexican goverment. The release of the regulations will start a major debate. The news in the next few weeks will be filled with challenges from the Left and Right This is big news. We may not need "reform" if we obey the laws and enforce them. What do you think, should the Federal regulations specifically outlaw illegal aliens from getting drivers licenses? Write your thought directly on the web site for all to see and discuss. [{{Feds release draft of national standard for driver's licenses}}->http://www.sacbee.com/111/v-print/story/136787.html] By Aurelio Rojas - Sacramento Bee March 13, 2007 The federal government has released long-awaited draft regulations creating a national standard for driver's licenses, but left California and other states to deal with the emotional issue of illegal immigrants. The Real ID Act regulations - which will require all 23 million California drivers to go in person to Department of Motor Vehicle offices - do not prohibit states from issuing licenses to illegal immigrants. But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who previously said the state would wait until the regulations were issued before grappling with the issue, now wants to wait until the federal government passes immigration reform. The release earlier this month of the regulations, expected to be finalized this fall, are likely to reignite debate in the Legislature over illegal immigrants. For the ninth consecutive year, state Sen. Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles, has introduced legislation - Senate Bill 60 - that would allow illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses. The legislation is likely to collide with a bill by Assemblyman Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, whose Assembly Bill 1433 is the Schwarzenegger administration's vehicle for conforming with the Real ID Act. Unless California conforms its licensing procedure to the federal standards, the state's licenses will not be accepted for federal purposes, such as entering government buildings or boarding airplanes.

Folks, this is going to be an unusual message from the California Political News and Views. Once before I wrote about a great musical album written by my good friend Jimmy Camp. He is the Bob Dylan of song writing for our generation. Now, I have seen some of the trailers for a new movie coming out sometime in September, "An American Carol". It was written by David Zucker. He is the man who gave us the "Airport" movies, as well as the classic "Naked Gun" movies with Leslie Nielsen. This movie is a spoof of Michael Moore, George Clooney, Ed Begley, Jr. and every other Hollywood hypocrite that wants freedom, but not for you. Newsmax has a story written by James Hirsen showing the Left has come alive in its opposition to the movie. Want to see an American classic? Go see "An American Carol". This time the joke is on the hypocritical Left. [ ‘American Carol’ Attacks Unleashed->http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CYSGCoflAA ] James Hirsen, Newsmax, 8/19/08 To see clips of the movie and the story behind it, go [here.->http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CYSGCoflAA ] One blogger refers to David Zucker’s latest film, “An American Carol,” as a “Zucker Movie Suicide Mission.” Another blogger asks the question: “What Happened to David Zucker?” Weird postings have been appearing on the Internet, insulting the maker of “Airplane” and “Naked Gun” with ridiculous insinuations like “he’s lost any comedic talent he once had,” that he was going to “destroy his cred” and that he and others, namely Dennis Miller, had become “aggressively unfunny.” Why all the anger? Well, maybe because Zucker is a former liberal who overhauled his political beliefs due, in part, to Hollywood’s reaction to 9/11. He eventually looked to his left and saw a vast reservoir of comic material. The filmmaker’s latest flick is a takeoff on Charles Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol.” And the neo-Ebenezer Scrooge character of Michael Mallone just happens to bear a strong resemblance to Michael Moore. In the movie, Mallone is visited by three spirits, those of John F. Kennedy, Gen. George Patton and George Washington, who try and teach him about the real meaning of American freedom. Featured in the film is a group of like-minded actors, a sterling cast that includes Jon Voight, Kelsey Grammer, James Woods, Dennis Hopper, Robert Davi, and country singer Trace Adkins. The late Chris Farley’s younger brother Kevin plays Mallone and is decked out as Moore’s doppelganger. Zucker actually anticipated that he would be attacked for going against the Hollywood grain. In an interview, which will appear in an upcoming Newsmax magazine, the filmmaker says that his approach wasn’t altered. In fact, the only thing that had changed was the subject matter, which in the case of “An American Carol” happens to be the lampooning of the far left, a unique concept in today’s Tinseltown. “All I’m doing, and all I’ve done for the last 30 years, is find things that are taken too seriously and expose them in a comedic fashion,” Zucker says. “Far left politics are taken too seriously. “Who would’ve thought airplane disaster movies would be material for jokes before ‘Airplane?’ Or serious Westerns would be funny until ‘Blazing Saddles’?” Zucker rhetorically asks. “My motivations have always been to first ask, ‘Where can I find good jokes?’” He’s optimistic that people from all points of the political spectrum will enjoy “An American Carol.” “Even though we are dealing with some serious subjects, we repeatedly remind the audience, ‘You are watching a comedy,’” he says. The lefties can scowl all they want; this movie is hilarious

The State tried to rip off a taxpayer, from another State. And got caught. The agency had a bigot run the audit, and got caught. The agency knew in 2003 they were caught, but still tried to steal the money. Now, with penalties, interest, court costs and attorney fees, the State of California is going to this man over $500 million. And, if we do not pay now, that will add up real quick. At a time when we have a $20 billion budget, a Prison Czar demanding the Governor steal $2.5 billion from the treasury--and will want at least $12.5 billion more, California is in a meltdown. The bigger question is why a relatively obscure tax newsletter published this story, not the Times, a Bee or the Chronicle. What are they hiding? Why did they refuse to tell us about this massive bigotry by a State agency, the theft of funds from a citizen of another State and the court decision which will cost us over $500 million? Shame of the State of California...we the people deserve and should demand an apology. {{ Hyatt Prevails in Lawsuit Against FTB – Jury Awards $137 Million for Invasion of Privacy and Emotional Distress, and May Add Punitive Damages}} Cal-Tax Newsletter, 8/8/08 Inventor Gilbert Hyatt has prevailed in his lawsuit against the Franchise Tax Board, as a Clark County (Nevada) District Court jury ruled in his favor August 6 on all causes of action, awarding him $137 million plus $1.08 million for attorney fees and court costs. The award included $52 million for invasion of privacy and $85 million for emotional distress intentionally inflicted upon Mr. Hyatt by the FTB, which was overseen by Executive Officer Gerald Goldberg during the residency audit that prompted Mr. Hyatt's lawsuit. A hearing is scheduled for today to determine whether punitive damages may be assessed, as well. If so, the jury will go back into deliberations to decide whether punitive damages are warranted, and in what amount. Nevada law provides that when compensatory damages are greater than $100,000, punitive damages can be no higher than three times that award. That equates to a maximum of $411 million in punitive damages possible in this case, meaning the FTB's total liability could reach $550 million. The FTB, which previously estimated its potential liability at $200 million, did not indicate whether it would appeal the decision. During the trial in Judge Jessie Walsh's courtroom, Mr. Hyatt's attorney told the jury that the FTB's lead auditor became obsessed with going after his client to further her own career, and also may have been motivated by racism. Testimony showed that while discussing Mr. Hyatt's case, the lead auditor said, "I'm going to get that Jew bastard!" Mr. Hyatt, inventor of a computer microprocessor chip and data storage system, said he moved from California to Nevada in October 1991, and he received a $40 million payment for licensing a patent shortly after the move. In 1993, after reading about Mr. Hyatt in a newspaper, FTB auditors examined his records and began a formal audit. In 1995, the FTB issued a determination letter claiming that Mr. Hyatt was a California resident in 1991 and part of 1992, and that he owed substantial taxes and massive penalties for fraud. The FTB continues to seek $49 million in the residency audit. That sum includes the 1991 tax year ($1.8 million in taxes, a $1.4 million fraud penalty and $7.2 million in interest) and the 1992 tax year ($5.6 million in taxes, a $4.2 million fraud penalty and $19 million in interest), plus a $10 million penalty for not taking part in the amnesty program. In 1996, Mr. Hyatt filed a protest that remained with the FTB until late last year and has yet to go before the Board of Equalization. In 1998, Mr. Hyatt sued the FTB in Nevada for its conduct during the audit. The FTB attempted to have the suit dismissed, saying a Nevada court does not have jurisdiction over a California tax agency, and further arguing that FTB employees are immune to prosecution for acts carried out as part of their jobs (California residents do not have the right to sue the FTB for alleged wrongdoing during the course of an audit). The FTB's challenge reached the U.S. Supreme Court, and in 2003 the high court ruled in Mr. Hyatt's favor, setting the stage for the just-ended trial. The jury agreed with Mr. Hyatt on all seven intentional tort claims that he asserted against the FTB: fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, abuse of process, breach of confidential relationship and three torts involving invasion of privacy (intrusion upon seclusion, publicity to private facts and false light). During the trial, Mr. Hyatt's lawyer told jurors the FTB sent letters containing the taxpayer's Social Security number to third parties, including newspapers, business partners and doctors who had never treated him. He also called witnesses who testified that the FTB ignored facts that did not fit a predetermined conclusion that Mr. Hyatt was a California resident for tax years 1991 and 1992, and assessed fraud penalties without evidence of fraud, simply to increase the pressure on Mr. Hyatt as taxes and penalties continued to accrue at a rate of $8,000 per day. The FTB's lawyer tried to persuade jurors that the tax agency was "doing its job" of investigating possible tax fraud, and that the audit was "common, average, everyday and ordinary." It is not known what effect the jury's decision will have on the underlying residency audit. The trial began April 21 in Las Vegas, and the case went to the jury on July 31. Mr. Hyatt was represented by Las Vegas lawyer Mark A. Hutchison. The FTB was represented by Pat Lundvall, a private lawyer from Reno who was contracted to defend the tax agency. California's state government had spent roughly $8.8 million on the case as of July 2007, plus an as-yet-unknown amount for expenses since that time. The case is Hyatt v. California State Franchise Tax Board, 98-A-382999-C.

"Meet your quota or be fired". That is a phrase heard in many businesses. But when your business is registering voters, and you know your employees are committing fraud, it becomes a crime, not a business decision. It appears there is not a single place in the country when when you find ACORN on the scene you will not find voter registration fraud as well. This is so bad that the FBI will finally investigate. The bad news is that if Obama wins, he will call off the FBI and demand they stop all such investigations--probably call them "profiling". ACORN agents have been convicted or found guilty in many States. In Indian, in just one county they submitted at least 2100 bad registration. In New Mexico the total was over 1250--and counting. Now we know that the workers have fear instilled in them if they do not reach their quota. Want voter fraud--see ACORN. Pass this on, let your friends know how corrupt the electoral process is going into the November 4th election. [ACORN INSTILLED FEAR: WORKERS->http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/10202008/news/politics/acorn_instilled_fear__workers_134390.htm] By ADAM NICHOLS and JEANE MacINTOSH, NY Post, 10/20/08 Pushed to meet daily quotas and bullied by bosses if they didn't, Ohio ACORN workers faked voter registrations, signed up people more than once, and even paid off registrants to keep from being fired, its canvassers told The Post. "Every day, there was pressure on us. Every single day," said Teshika Elder, a Cleveland single mom of three who worked for ACORN this summer. "We had meetings every morning where they'd go over your quota; they'd yell at you if you were low," said Elder, 21. "They'd sit us down and say if you didn't do better, they'd suspend you. They'd say, 'Try harder next time,' [and] if you didn't get it, you'd be fired." Desperate canvassers sometimes resorted to trading cigarettes, cash and food in exchange for registrations, according to Elder and two other former ACORN workers, Jaymes Sanford, 18, and Selvin Cunningham, 23. Some voters were signed up more than once, and said that worried - or lazy - canvassers sometimes filled out bogus cards. The three workers were all fired after they and a dozen other canvassers were identified in a Cuyahoga County Election Board probe as having turned in multiple registrations for the same voters. The board, which estimates it got more than 8,700 suspect cards - with multiple registrations, bad addresses or phony information - from ACORN has turned the matter over to local prosecutors. "It was just little stuff - a dollar, a cigarette - given to people so that they'd register," said Sanford, a former team leader. "People are scared of not making their quotas," he said. "I didn't do it, but it's the way it worked." Elder added, "I've got no money to give out. I don't smoke, so I had no cigarettes to offer. But other people did, and the pressure you were under forced you to." Cunningham, who also had been a team leader, said, "They're pretty lenient if you're off [quota] by just a few names. But if you're repeatedly missing your quota, if you only had three or four [people signed up], then you might start paying people." Anyone caught offering bribes, Cunningham said, was supposed to be fired. But a woman with Cunningham who identified herself as a current ACORN director said not all rogue canvassers are shown the door. "Those guys are still working at ACORN," said the director, who asked not to be identified. "We know who they are; we've told them not to do it. But they weren't among the people fired." The director also confirmed the ousted workers' quota claims: team leaders, who are paid $9 an hour, are required to get 26 registrations a day. Canvassers, who make $8 an hour, need 22 sign-ups. Sanford, who estimates he registered 500 to 1,000 voters, and Cunningham, who signed up about 1,500, said its hard not to get multiple registrations. "When you're asking 1,000 people a day if they registered, you don't remember every face," Cunningham said.

["The Next Right"->http://www.thenextright.com/] is a wonderful newsletter sent out daily, from a conservative perspective. It is tough on the Left, as well as willing to point out the negatives of the Right. It is willing to point out the hypocrisy of the Left and the missed opportunities of the Right. They are bringing the latest information on the next Vice President Sarah Palin. Please check it out, go to the various web sites. Looks like the Democrats need a Valium. They are banging their heads, making up stories even Michael Moore would be embarrassed to tell. BO and Biden are making Rosie O'Donnell seem sane. Isn't it amazing, the Left is concerned that a believer in America, not an apologist will make it into the White House--just as they were measuring the drapes. Pass this on, let your friends know that help in on the way, in a skirt. [Sarah Palin News Roundup->http://www.thenextright.com/] The Next Right, 9/6/08 [Daily Kos->http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/6/12251/86155/90/587746] wants to hang Sarah Palin's church around her neck. I'm not sure they've thought that [through very well.->http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright_controversy] Does Open Left really want to [compare Obama to Jesus->http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=8006]? [ Media Matters->http://mediamatters.org/items/200809010012] attacks "McCain's false claim that Obama was community organizer when Palin was in office". But then they acknowledge that "Palin joined the Wasilla city council ... in 1992, the year Obama[ served->http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/January-1993/Vote-of-Confidence/] as director of Chicago's Project Vote! -- the local chapter of a national voter registration organization." Which would seem to make McCain's claim quite accurate. [LA Progressive->http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/05/alaskans-speak-in-a-frightened-whisper-palin-is-%C3%A2??racist-sexist-vindictive-and-mean%C3%A2?%C2%9D/] is implausibly accusing Gov. Palin of uttering a number of very racist comments. Their "source", of course, is uncheckably anonymous. I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate that the only person in this story that made these racist comments is author Charley James, who is perfectly willing to use racism to advance his political goals. (Note the Progressive may have alrwady taken this story down) This appears to be a pattern. The Leftosphere has also decided that, while there's absolutely no confirmation beyond a partisan blogger who just remembered it in time to write a book this year, [Cliff Schecter's allegation of McCain calling his wife a [word I won't use] is good enough for them.->http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_temper_boiled_over_in_92_0407.html] {{(Note: Cliff gets dirty, mean and uses filthy language here)}} Amusingly/depressingly, [Charley James->http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/05/alaskans-speak-in-a-frightened-whisper-palin-is-%C3%A2??racist-sexist-vindictive-and-mean%C3%A2?%C2%9D/] also accuses Gov. Palin of being vocally racist against Eskimos. Um...Sarah Palin's husband, Todd Palin, is "of [Eskimo ancestry.->http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20223589,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines]" (Note: Again the Progressive is embarrassed being cuaght so may have taken down the story) [ Charles Martin->http://explorations.chasrmartin.com/2008/09/06/palin-rumors/] has a full list of Sarah Palin rumors, along with the facts, rebuttals and relevant information. Good News: Sarah Palin makes the Left crazy. Bad News: We're not finding the answers to much more [important questions about Sarah Palin.->http://thenextright.com/rob-bluey/the-promise-and-the-peril-of-sarah-palin]

A Cure Worse Than the Disease

By: Ed Feulner, CNSNews.com, 5/5/09


Canada's health care system too often proves a death sentence for cancer patients.
Emily Morley got some very bad news in March 2006. Her cancer had spread, the doctor informed the 67-year-old Canadian. She would need to see an oncologist.
 
Then Morley got some really bad news: Shed have to wait several months before she could get an appointment.
 
Only after her family raised a ruckus, calling the local paper and starting a petition to demand she get care, did the government get her a specialist. Then, it was more bad news: Morley had only three months to live.
 
At least she had time to put her affairs in order. Had her family not intervened, noted provincial lawmaker Don McMorris, it is quite likely that Emily Morley may have died before even seeing an oncologist for the first time.
 
But thats how a single-payer, or universal, health care system works (so to speak). Even the very ill routinely hurry up and wait.
 
Alarmingly, Congress is gearing up to reform American health care along Canadian lines and proponents are trying to take a short-cut to get there. According to former Medicaid director Dennis Smith, proponents of a government-run health system are hoping to enact a bill by by-passing the usual, lengthy bipartisan review process.
 
The goal of any reform, supposedly, would be to trigger competition between government-run health care and currently existing private health insurance plans. Yet, Smith warns, the government will inevitably tilt the playing field to favor its own plan, running private coverage out of business. Americans could be left with a single, government-run health plan ࠬa Canadas.
 
So lets take a look at what such a system means for our northern neighbors.
 
As Sally Pipes, president of the Pacific Research Institute and a former Canadian citizen, recently told Congress, today some 750,000 Canadians are on a wait-list for medical procedures.
 
Further, 3.2 million (out of a population of 32 million) are waiting for a chance to see their primary-care physician. Once a PCP diagnoses a problem, Canadians must keep on waiting 17.3 weeks on average before they can see a specialist.
 
Why? The Canadian government controls costs by rationing care, Pipes explained. Canada ranks 14th out of 25 [Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development] countries in MRI machines, and 19th out of 26 countries in CT scanners. Long wait times and lack of equipment force many to seek care in the United States.
 
Take Member of Parliament Belinda Stronach. She strongly supports Canadas health care system. But where did she go when she was diagnosed with cancer in 2007? To California, where she paid for treatment out-of-pocket.
 
Then there was a mother in Calgary, Alberta, who had to be flown to Great Falls, Mont., to deliver her quadruplets. This relatively small American city had better facilities than any hospital in the wealthy province of Alberta.
 
Our current system is far from perfect, of course. Millions of Americans lack health insurance, prompting many to put off seeing a doctor until a small, treatable problem has become a larger, more threatening condition.
 
But the answer isnt to try and cover everyone through a single-payer system. Wed be better off changing how the federal tax code treats health insurance (which, illogically enough in our 21st century economy, ties it to our jobs).
 
Such a change would foster genuine competition among insurers by allowing Americans to shop for the coverage that suits them best in an open market.
 
Current policy provides unlimited tax breaks for health coverage provided through employers.
 
Meanwhile, Americans who want to buy their own insurance must do so with after-tax dollars. Few can afford to do that, especially since insurers are more interested in competing for big group coverage (more lives, more money) rather than individual or family-based coverage.
 
Lawmakers could change this, and even provide vouchers or other forms of direct assistance to help poorer Americans buy private plans they would own and control. This would also make insurance portable when people change jobs.
 
Maintaining our standard of care is critical. Theres a reason Canadians fly south for treatment: Our system, for all its flaws, provides superior quality and access to care. Lets ensure that policymakers, in their understandable zeal to reform health care, dont make changes that weaken the entire system.

Ed Feulner is president of the Heritage Foundation.

State committee to hear of ADA shakedown lawsuits

BY CHRIS RIZO, Legal Newline, 10/19/09  


Small business owners say they plan give California lawmakers an ear full today about how their livelihoods are being threatened by shakedown lawsuits filed over alleged ADA violations.

Mom and pop shops and other small and mid-sized businesses say a cottage industry has sprung up in the Golden State in which trial lawyers are filing lawsuits over alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and state disability access laws.

Businesses, along with advocates for tort reform, plan to voice their concerns today at the first meeting of the California Commission on Disability Access.

"The ADA is law; people have to follow the law. We've never said anything against that," said Tom Scott, executive director of Californians Against Lawsuit Abuse.

Scott said there is a "huge" education problem with the law, noting that many business owners simply are not aware of their responsibilities under the statute.

"Look, if 98 percent of the state is not compliant, then there is a bigger problem here, and it's not because businesses are trying to alienate their customer base," Scott said.

He said one of the goals of the advisory commission ought to be to increase voluntary compliance with state and federal ADA laws by creating a one-stop shop for businesses to learn about the law.

"We really need to educate businesses," Scott told Legal Newsline in a telephone interview.

The 17-member ADA advisory panel has on it representatives from the state Legislature and the business and disabled communities.

The commission was created last year by bipartisan legislation -- Senate Bill 1608 -- backed by the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Restaurant Association. The bill was signed into law by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"The CCDA efforts are intended to facilitate business compliance with applicable disabled access laws, building standards and regulations, and most importantly, to reduce and, if possible, avoid unnecessary litigation," the commission says.

On the commission is state Sen. Tom Harman of Huntington Beach, vice chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Republican candidate for state attorney general.

Among business owners planning to attend the state Capitol hearing is Travis Hausauer, whose Squeeze Inn restaurant in Sacramento has been the target of two lawsuits that alleged violations of state law and the ADA.

The federal lawsuit, which has since been dropped, was filed in July by Kimberly Block of Sacramento. The 41-year-old wheelchair-bound woman has sued at least three other small businesses for ADA violations this year.

In her lawsuit -- filed by attorney Jason Singleton of Eureka, Calif. -- Block alleged that neither the front door nor parking at the popular burger joint was accessible to disabled patrons. She also said the restaurant's seating area, which consists of 11 bar stools, was not handicap accessible.

The lawsuit sought to force Hausauer to make the improvements and to pay an unspecified amount for damages. When Block's lawsuit came about Hausauer said he had already remodeled the restaurant's unisex restroom to resolve an earlier ADA lawsuit.

Although the target of two ADA lawsuits in recent months, Hausauer said he sill believes the federal law offers disabled Americans landmark protections. But the law has created a "cottage industry" for trial lawyers to go after small businesses, he added.

"It is a good law and it went a long way to give equal access," he told Legal Newsline. "The problem is there are no protections for business owners."

Friends:

Obama was part of the movement to force banks to make high risk loans but he now blames them!

 by Steve Baldwin, 12/14/09
 
This week we saw Obama on all the news shows blaming banks for the credit crisis saying that "you guys caused the problem" and calling them "fat cats."
 
This is the height of hypocrisy.  Let me remind everyone that banks only operate within the regulatory environment that politicians create for them.  All throughout the 80's and 90's, leftist groups led by ACORN harassed banks with protests, boycotts and lawsuits, falsely claiming banks were "discriminating" against minorities in terms of their lending practices. 
 
The allegations were bogus.  Banks do discriminate, however, against people with shaky finances regardless of race. And they should.  Banks are not a welfare program. They're a business.   They make lending decisions based on hard numbers such as a person's credit rating.  That really don't care what race a person is; if someone's credit history gives a bank reason to believe its loan will be paid back, they'll make the loan.  However, this was all before Congress started to meddle in banks'  lending decisions.
 
Many of the 60's activists ended up getting involved with groups that harassed banks and filing lawsuits against them. Some of these suits were successful in that they often ended in settlements in which the banks agreed to make high risk loans to people who simply were not credit worthy. Eventually, this movement led to Congressional legislation called the Community Reinvestment Act, which applied even more pressure onto banks to make lending decisions based not on fiscal worthiness but on "diversity."  And that was the beginning of the credit crisis.  
 
So lets be clear here. Banks have been forced to make high risk loans as a result of years of protests, legislation, boycotts, and the CRA act.  And who was involved with all of this? Why, our very own anointed one.  Barack Obama.
 
You can see his name here in the actual docket from one ACORN suit against Citibank:
http://www.mediacircus.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/FH-IL-0011-9000.pdf
 
Or you can read more about this case here: 
http://www.mediacircus.com/2008/10/obama-sued-citibank-under-cra-to-force-it-to-make-bad-loans/
 
Yet Obama has the audacity to blame banks for acting under regulations that the movement created by ACORN successfully pushed for?
 
Not that's chutzpah.
 
Obama's defenders have tried to play this down, saying that Obama was only one of a group of attorneys involved with the case and was not the lead attorney. That is true, but what they ignore is the fact that Obama was involved in many aspects of ACORN, from speaking at its training schools to encouraging leftist foundations to give it funding.  Obama deeply believes in ACORN's anti-corporate, anti-free market philosophy, including the belief that banks engaged in racism even though no one has even proved this reckless allegation.
 
It time to face the truth folks:  Obama was part of the "social justice" movement which created the incredibly stupid regulatory climate that caused banks to make loans they otherwise would never have made. 
 
 
Steve Baldwin
Baldwin Research & Consulting

A $1-billion bad idea for Jordan Downs
The L.A. Housing Authority proposal for a 2,100-unit project represents a stunning waste of money and opens the door wide to fraud. Focusing on the benefits of less crime could revitalize the area.

By T.A. Frank, LA Times, 11/08/09

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-frank8-2009nov08,0,4723504,print.story

Bad ideas, if they were ever widely accepted, have a curious way of sticking around. That's because they give rise to institutions that have a momentum of their own. We've long known there are better ways to fix blighted neighborhoods than simply pressing "reset" -- that is, letting the government tear down old buildings and put up new ones. But we remain saddled with a system of public housing that keeps looking for ways of, well, pressing reset.

And now that bad idea is coming to Watts, with an estimated price tag of $1 billion. What we have, then, is not just a bad idea but a really expensive bad idea.

Here's what we know so far. The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles -- with the support of the mayor, the City Council and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) -- plans to tear down the 700-unit Jordan Downs housing project and replace it with a 2,100-unit, mixed-income development -- one with stores, restaurants, perhaps even an elementary school. There are also plans to refurbish nearby Jordan High School. In the end, it is hoped this ambitious project will not only fix Jordan Downs but set the stage for a recovery throughout Watts.

Now, the idea of getting rid of Jordan Downs isn't intrinsically bad. Nor is the idea of spending a billion dollars on Watts. But specifics matter. I might want a necktie, and I might want $1 million, but I don't want a $1-million necktie.

With $1 billion, we could give each of the roughly 700 families in Jordan Downs $1 million and still have $300 million in hand. Of course, the actual $1-billion plan includes housing and amenities for 2,100 families. But even if we allowed, say, $400 million for retail and infrastructure (or the price tag for the massive Americana at Brand in Glendale), the per-unit cost would still be close to $300,000. Meanwhile, perfectly habitable three-bedroom houses in Watts are going unsold at prices of $150,000 or less.

Then there's the question of who's overseeing the redevelopment. That would be the Housing Authority, which many residents of Jordan Downs distrust. That's understandable. The agency has for decades treated them -- and taxpayers' money -- with highhanded neglect or worse. In the 1990s, for example, a multimillion-dollar renovation left residents with sewage in their kitchen sinks. In 2004, the agency's top two officials left abruptly -- one after a scandal involving overpayment of subsidies and the other after a federal audit uncovered $1.7 million in overbilling, improper spending and unsubstantiated costs.

Today the agency has new leaders but, sadly, many old habits. In 2007, a top manager, Victor Taracena, was fired for allegedly directing more than $800,000 worth of contracts to family members. In August 2008, the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development found that the Housing Authority had improperly used more than $27 million in restricted funds to cover its operating losses. And in November 2008, 63% of Housing Authority-subsidized, privately owned units that HUD inspected "did not meet housing quality standards." Added to all this is a striking lack of transparency. For instance, Housing Authority officials declined numerous requests for interviews about the financial details of the Jordan Downs project.

Supporters of the redevelopment acknowledge these concerns but consider the idea of a fresh start for Watts too inspiring to refuse. They point to places such as Atlanta, where government renewal projects revived dangerous neighborhoods. They also mention Boyle Heights, where the Housing Authority's redevelopment of the Aliso Village projects had a positive effect.

But such projects also included the dispersal of many of the residents. While this was often carried out in an ugly and unfair way, it at least cleared out many tenants who were dangerous or otherwise undesirable. (Fewer than 300 out of 1,200 displaced families returned to Aliso Village, for instance.) The Jordan Downs plan calls for no one to be displaced. That's good news for the residents, but it's unlikely to replicate the revival in Atlanta.

Los Angeles has other choices with Jordan Downs. City officials seem to believe that clearing away blight is the key to attracting jobs and reducing crime, but couldn't it work the opposite way? In New York in the late 1990s, when crime rates dropped, neighborhoods quickly saw the economic benefits. In Brooklyn, according to City Journal, after crime dropped by 45% along blighted Franklin Avenue, 22 new stores opened in 16 months. In Harlem, where shootings were once daily occurrences, the turnaround has been so dramatic that people now complain about new arrivals like Starbucks.

In Watts, the Los Angeles Police Department, partnering with groups such as the Watts Gang Task Force, brought homicide rates down by 50% between 2006 and 2008, and community-police relations have significantly improved. This is a promising foundation on which to build -- with increased community policing and incentives for businesses -- and it wouldn't involve the Housing Authority spending millions on the construction of new housing amid a housing glut.

Not that Jordan Downs and its inhabitants should be left behind. Here's a better way to spend $1 billion in Watts: Have the agency buy every family in Jordan Downs a $300,000 renovated house nearby, and you've spent $210 million. That leaves a clean $790 million for more law enforcement, new and improved schools and so much more.

As for Jordan Downs itself, the city could help plug its deficit and get additional residential units into Watts by selling the complex to a builder who comes up with a blueprint for pleasant, affordable, market-rate housing. Or it could help create tenant-owned cooperatives, much like what the nonprofit Jacobs Center for Neighborhood Innovation has been doing in San Diego. Or it could convert the land into a much-needed park.

I know: Urban renewal doesn't work this way. While it would be nice to have $1 billion to divvy up creatively, redevelopment depends on existing funding mechanisms, such as tax credits, federal assistance and a bureaucracy locked into hitting reset. But this only underscores what a straitjacket our public housing system has become.

None of this is to deny that, by supporting the Jordan Downs plan, many officials are fighting honorably to help an area in need. But that doesn't make the project a sensible answer to the question of how to revive Watts. The potential for waste and perhaps even fraud, the lack of a truly imaginative plan, the indications that the Housing Authority is very much as it ever was -- all of this suggests we're about to misspend a lot of dollars at a time when dollars are scarce. The plan for Jordan Downs is, in short, a very bad idea. And today, good ones are all we can afford.

T.A. Frank is an Irvine fellow at the New America Foundation.