Five Transgender Bills Targeting Concerned Parents Awaiting Gov. Newsom’s Signature or Veto

The sexualization of California school kids is escalating to an ugly place

A teacher friend recently shared with me curriculum required by the school district for use in the early elementary classroom on “gender expression.” It is a video called “Expressing Myself. My Way.” The tag line on the video gives a little hint of the content: “Gender expression is how we choose to show the world where on the gender spectrum we identify. We can do that through clothing, makeup, jewelry, tone of voice, taking hormones, and more.”

The video is in cartoon with cute, lovable animal characters who at first glance look alike, but when they sing about their gender differences, the movie is promoting acceptance of abandoning the gender he/she was born with, and assuming a new identity.

The teacher friend and I discussed at length LGBTQ law in California, and the more current teaching of gender, trans and LGBTQ identities in the classroom.

I harkened back to 2011 when SB 48 by then-Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) was passed and Gov. Brown signed it into law. It was very general in language, and required California schools to teach students about the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans in social science instruction.

However, SB 48 also became the overarching catch-all for anything LGBTQ in education – and the left has been making the most of it, while simultaneously diminishing actual education, resulting in California students ranking 50th in literacy in the entire country.

Flash forward to 2023: Now the Legislature has passed five new LGBTQ and trans-specific bills, playing legal catch-up, given how much LGBTQ and trans lesson plans have made it into Kindergarten through 12th grade classrooms:

  1. Assembly Bill 957 by Assemblywoman Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City) and co-authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), a parent could lose custody for not “affirming” or agreeing to a child’s claims about gender identity, and be charged with child abuse. Perhaps even more disturbing, bizarre, and ironic, in the State of California where the policy of California public schools is to keep “gender” information hidden from parents, how could a divorcing parent even know if they are affirming their child’s “gender identity?”
  2. Assembly Bill 665 by Assemblywoman Wendy Carrillo (D-Los Angeles) would allow children as young as 12 years to consent to mental health treatment or counseling without parental approval or involvement.In California it is already law to allow a minor who is 12 years of age to consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services, “if the minor is mature enough to participate intelligently in the outpatient services or residential shelter services, or if the minor is the alleged victim of incest or child abuse.”That law, Senate Bill 543 was authored by then-Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) in 2010, and sponsored by Equality California, the National Association of Social Workers California Chapter, Mental Health America of Northern California, and the Gay Straight Alliance Network. SB 543, ostensibly to help LGBT and homeless youth, was signed into law in 2010 by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.Carrillo’s bill will remove the additional requirement that the child must present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to themselves or to others, or be the alleged victim of incest or child abuse – in order to consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services.
  3. AB 5would require LGBTQ+ training for teachers in all of California’s public schools – not just sensitivity training, but training to to be used to target parents who aren’t properly affirming the chosen gender of their child. It is sponsored by The California Federation of Teachers.
  4. SB 407  a bill by Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), would ensure that unless all potential foster parents are willing to “affirm” LGBTQ gender and sexuality in foster youth, and any gender transitioning, they will be prohibited by the state from being foster parents. Sen. Wiener introduced his bill during the Senate Human Services Committee in April saying, “We want to make sure we aren’t placing these children in homes where there is hostility towards them.” The “hostile” homes the Senator refers to are religious families. Sen. Wiener said foster youth who identify as LGBTQ need protection from physical and psychological abuse coming from non-affirming foster parents.
  5. Assemblyman Corey Jackson (D-Perris) authored Assembly Bill 1078 ostensibly to make it harder to “ban” school textbooks in California – but the “school textbooks” Jackson refers to are highly sexualized, and in many cases, just plain porn. Assemblyman Jackson says “AB 1078 is a bill that intends to combat the national Christian white supremacist movement which aims to ban books, school curriculum, and even more in our schools.” Assemblyman Jackson is using the tortured “national Christian white supremacist movement” to give cover for grossly inappropriate books:  The Globe reported on “Gender Queer: A Memoir” last year, a book found in school libraries across the country which has cartoon drawings of oral sex, masturbation, and describes how to use sex toys.Lawn Boy: featured on MSNBC’s Ali Velshi  Banned Books Club, Lawn Boy is billed as a “coming-of-age story,” but is filled with graphic sex acts between children. The interview with Lawn Boy author is just bizarre. The author insists he uses “course language” throughout the book, and not “graphic language.”More than 35 school districts in 20 states temporarily removed “Lawn Boy” from library shelves.Since then, many states have passed legislation addressing pornographic, obscene school textbooks and library books.Trans+: Love, Sex, Romance, and Being You: Amazon describes Trans+ this way: “A groundbreaking all-inclusive, uncensored, must-have guide for teens who are living in this world, who identify as transgender, nonbinary, gender non-conforming, gender fluid, or are questioning their gender identity or how they express themselves, and for their cis-allies and advocates.”The book contains 75 QR codes, marked as “resources” which take children to unbelievably graphic obscene sex websites. CRI posted a short video on Instagram showing where the links take children. Warning: video it contains obscenity and pornographic images. England says Trans+ is available in school libraries across the country.

This California sexual education curriculum also includes:

  • Kindergarten books that introduce 5-year-olds to families with members who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender.
  • First grade gender vocabulary lessons on words such as third gender, trans, queergender, non-binary, gender fluid, gender neutral, agender, bigender, and two-spirits.
  • Lessons for 1st graders that provide detailed descriptions of sex with these quotes such as: “The man’s penis goes inside the woman’s vagina,” and “sperm can swim out through the small opening in the man’s penis – and into the woman’s vagina.”
  • Pictures in a book for third graders showing a cartoon drawing of a penis ejaculating sperm while inserted into a vagina.
  • Lessons which teach third graders that sexual reproductive organs don’t always match a person’s gender.
  • Recommendations that fifth graders are taught sexual health lessons that must include examples of same-sex sexual activity. Students should not be separated by sex during these lessons to avoid “misgendering” students.
  • Books that introduce 10-year-olds to anal sex, and the slang for male and female genitals.
school books, teaching children as young as age 5, inappropriate slang for male and female body parts. (Photo: Katy Grimes for California Globe)
school books, teaching children as young as age 5, inappropriate slang for male and female body parts. (Photo: Katy Grimes for California Globe)

Assemblyman Jackson and other Democrat lawmakers continue to deceive when discussing textbook “book bans.” If the cartoon movie above about gender preferences is any indication of just how far the gender pushers will go to target very little children, lying about the books they are also pushing is a cakewalk.  Each of the books linked here also have cartoon drawings, clearly targeting kids, while illustrating various sex acts.

Schools have jumped way ahead of the law, which appears to be catching up this legislative session – out of legal need. And that is because parents are on to the very well-coordinated effort to include pornographic material in K-12 public schools.

Click here to read the full article in California Globe

California Fast Food and Health Care Workers Poised to Win Major Salary Increases

 Nearly 1 million California workers are poised to win major salary increases after labor unions flexed their collective muscle in the state’s Democratic-led Legislature on Monday following a summer of high-profile strikes in the entertainment and hospitality industries.

Most of the state’s 500,000 fast food workers would be paid at least $20 per hour next year under a new bill aimed at ending a standoff between the industry and labor unions over wages and working conditions. About 455,000 health care workers — not doctors and nurses, but the people who do everything else at hospitals, dialysis clinics and other facilities — will see their salaries rise to at least $25 per hour over the next 10 years in a separate bill.

Both proposals must first pass the state Legislature and be signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom. But the proposals have the blessing of both labor unions and industry groups, clearing the path for passage this week before lawmakers adjourn for the year.

An added bonus for voters: The November 2024 ballot will be a little less crowded. The fast food industry has agreed to withdraw its referendum on a fast food law that Newsom signed last year.

The bills, both introduced Monday, are just some of the impressive run of results for labor unions in the state Legislature this year. Also on Monday, the state Assembly voted to advance a proposal to give striking workers unemployment benefits — a policy change that could eventually benefit Hollywood actors and writers and Los Angeles-area hotel workers who have been on strike for much of this year.

“I think fast food cooks and cashiers have fundamentally changed the politics of wages in this country and have reshaped what working people believe is possible when they join together and take on corporate power and systemic racism,” said Mary Kay Henry, international president of the Service Employees International Union.

California’s minimum wage is already among the highest in the country at $15.50 per hour. The fast food bill would increase that minimum wage to $20 per hour for workers at restaurants in California that have at least 60 locations nationwide — with an exception for restaurants that make and sell their own bread, like Panera Bread.

The bill will affect about 500,000 fast food workers in California, according to the Service Employees International Union, which has been working to unionize fast food workers in the state. They include Ingrid Vilorio, who works at a Jack In The Box in the San Francisco Bay Area. She said the raise will help her family, who until recently was sharing a house with two other families to afford rent.

“A lot of us (in the fast-food industry) have to have two jobs to make ends meet. This will give us some breathing space,” said Vilorio, who also works as a nanny.

The $20 hourly wage would be a starting point. The nine-member Fast Food Council, which would include representatives from the restaurant industry and labor, would have the power to increase that minimum wage each year by up to 3.5% or the change in the U.S. consumer price index for urban wage earners and clerical workers, whichever is lower.

The wage increase for health care workers is more complicated. Their salaries will rise gradually over the next decade, depending on where they work. Workers for large health care facilities and dialysis clinics will see their pay jump to at least $23 per hour next year, increasing to $25 per hour by 2026. Workers at rural hospitals with lots of Medicaid patients would have their salaries increase to at least $18 per hour next year, with 3.5% increases each year until it reaches $25 per hour in 2033.

Workers at community clinics will see their salaries rise to at least $21 per hour in 2024 before peaking at $25 per hour in 2027. Salaries at all other covered health care facilities will increase to at least $21 per hour next year before reaching $25 per hour by 2028.

“Everyone in the healthcare sector understands that we have a workforce crisis, and that wages are the essential prerequisite for any solution,” said Tia Orr, executive director of the Service Employees International Union-California. “With this increase, more workers will join and stay in the healthcare workforce, and as a result Californians will be safer and better cared for.”

It’s unusual, but not unprecedented, for states to have minimum wages for specific industries. Minnesota lawmakers created a council to set wages for nursing home workers. In 2021, Colorado announced a $15 minimum wage for direct care workers in home and community-based services.

In California, most fast food workers are over 18 and the main providers for their family, according to Enrique Lopezlira, director of the University of California-Berkeley Labor Center’s Low Wage Work Program. Just over 75% of health care workers in California are women, and 76% are workers of color, according to a study published earlier this year by the UC Berkely Labor Center.

Hospitals support the bill in part because it “ensures that wages for health care workers are set by the state, creating greater equity for all of California’s health care workforce,” said Carmela Coyle, president and CEO of the California Hospital Association.

The fast food industry benefits by stopping two proposals they say would have made it much harder for restaurants to operate in California. Labor unions agreed to withdraw a bill that would have held big fast food corporations like McDonald’s liable for the misdeeds of their independent franchise operators in the state.

And Democrats in the state Legislature agreed to strip funding for the Industrial Welfare Commission, an agency that has the power to set wage and workplace standards for multiple industries.

Click here to read the full article in AP News

COVID Hysterics Hype ‘Positive Patients’ …and Cancel High School Football Game

‘Sacramento County’s COVID-19 hospital patient total jumps 48% in a week as uptick continues’

“The number of hospital patients with COVID-19 in Sacramento County jumped nearly 50% in one week, reaching its highest level in five months, as the gradual increase in spread of the virus has yet to wane in California,” The Sacramento Bee breathlessly reported.

Oh holy @#$! We’re all going to die… (eventually).

Wait. How many COVID patients are we talking about in Sacramento County? Am I reading this correctly – 89 total? Sacramento County has 1.5 million total population.

Last year at this time, there were 168 “positive patients” in Sacramento County, and 25 in the ICU, according to the California Department of Public Health. I don’t recall any headlines last year like this one from the Bee today:

Sacramento County’s COVID-19 hospital patient total jumps 48% in a week as uptick continues

“There were 1,722 total hospital patients with COVID-19 in California as of Sept. 2, according to the most recent state data. That’s the same number of patients statewide as one week earlier, according to a weekly update Friday from the California Department of Public Health.”

1,722 total hospital patients with COVID out of 40 million people in California? Even with more people dying from Heart Disease and Cancer, it’s telling that public health officials are trying to increase fear in COVID again. The entire country can’t be locked down for heart disease or cancer, but they succeeded with COVID once already.

The CDC reports:

In 2022, approximately 3,273,705 deaths occurred in the United States. The estimated 2022 age-adjusted death rate decreased by 5.3%, from 879.7 per 100,000 persons in 2021 to 832.8. COVID-19 was reported as the underlying cause or a contributing cause in an estimated 244,986 (7.5%) of those deaths (61.3 deaths per 100,000).

During 2022, the three leading causes of death were heart disease (699,659 deaths), cancer (607,790), and unintentional injury (218,064).

CDC graphic top leading causes of death.

According to the CDC, “COVID-19 was the underlying cause for 5.7% of all deaths in 2022, decreasing from 12.0% (416,893 deaths) in 2021. Heart disease and cancer deaths increased in 2022 compared with 2021 (accounting for 695,547 and 605,213, deaths respectively), while deaths associated with COVID-19 decreased.”

Locally, Esparto High School in Yolo County cancelled a football game Friday night because 6 players tested positive for COVID-19 — and 7 players were out with injuries. I assume the players are required to test for COVID? The school district said the game cancellation was necessary because the players could pass COVID to the other team.

I’m willing to bet the players weren’t sick – they just tested positive.

Here are all of Yolo County’s COVID stats: 3 COVID positive patients and 1 in the ICU – out of 222,000 total population.

Oh – Sacramento County still hasn’t updated its COVID dashboard since February 2023 – they must really be concerned about it:

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

Geriatric Congress: Nancy Pelosi, 83, Announces She is Running AGAIN

Senior members of Congress hold some of the most important committee positions, yet probably can’t tell you what they ate for breakfast

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Twitter Friday she is running for reelection. Pelosi, who was born in 1940 and is now 83, will be 86 at the end of her next term in Congress.

In the summer of 1940, France had just fallen to the Nazis and Britain was fighting for survival. U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt began to prepare America for war.

Now, 83 years later, Nancy Pelosi, who if she was an airline pilot, would have been required to retire at age 65 – in 2005 – and perhaps like an aging airline pilot, has only gotten more dangerous after age 65.

“Now more than ever our City needs us to advance San Francisco values and further our recovery. Our country needs America to show the world that our flag is still there, with liberty and justice for ALL. That is why I am running for reelection — and respectfully ask for your vote. -Nancy”

Is Pelosi talking about the San Francisco values that have rendered her city a crime-laden hell hole? According to a new Gallup poll released lagte August, one-half of Americans view San Francisco as unsafe. And it’s probably worse than their perception.

Another report in August found that San Francisco has had the worst recovery of any city from the pandemic. I know – show me your SHOCKED face.

Is that the City whose values Pelosi touts, where drug addicted street vagrants drop their pants to poop on the street? Maybe Nancy would like to step out of her chauffeured limousine and take a stroll along San Francisco streets as detailed in the official “defecation map.” Or visit the empty shells of the sumptuous retail establishments, boutiques and high end markets she used to frequent. Or try to pick up a prescription at a San Francisco Walgreens… (Are all of them gone now?)

Pelosi has serious insider trading accusations to deal with, leading many to assume she, as with the other elderly members of the House and Senate (Feinstein, McConnell), stick around to manage their dubious dealings. Could they really want to die while in office otherwise?

As I reported in 2021, if the more elderly members of Congress ran for local political offices instead – City Council and County Supervisor seats – they likely would not be elected as local voters would recognize that they had reached an age where they should retire, save for a few vibrant and relevant ones. But tucked away safely in Washington D.C., away from local prying eyes and local scrutiny, these incumbents continue to be reelected.

While most Americans are looking to retire as they near age 65 or 70, it appears members of Congress are just getting warmed up as they age. They’ve been in office so many years, their special interest funders need them to remain. And that is the real priority – special interests, rather than constituents, particularly for members in office for decades.

This is clearly becoming a serious issue. And it’s not a Republican or Democrat thing – it’s an issue in both political parties. These Senior members of Congress hold some of the most important committee positions, yet some probably can’t tell you what they ate for breakfast. They deal with (rather, their senior staff deal with) national security, defense and the military, appropriations, homeland security, judiciary, and are privy to national secrets.

With 90-year old U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) reportedly having very public cognitive issues, this is a serious situation. Who is Feinstein’s handler, because surely she has one? Who finishes her sentences for her? Who whispers answers in her ear? Who directs her to the next meeting? Who prepares cheat sheets of notes for her? Who runs interference for Feinstein with the media?

Perhaps most important, who made her 20-year Chinese spy staffer problem go away? How is it that no one in Congress demanded an investigation into her office? Did Nancy or Mitch have anything to do with that?

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) certainly has her own age-related issues, despite some of the best medical care in the world, and an obviously skilled plastic surgeon. As Speaker prior to losing the House to Republicans, to call Pelosi awkward during television interviews was an understatement. She slurred her words, appeared unable to coherently finish a sentence, made weird jerky movements with her hands, and still does that funny thing with her lips over her teeth.

Pelosi loses her temper very quickly when asked a real question, similar to President Joe Biden’s reaction. Pelosi was a very attractive woman for many years, and likely would still be, naturally, if she hadn’t messed with Mother Nature. We all age – there is no cheating the aging process.

And what about Pelosi husband Paul’s DUI misadventure in Napa? Immediately following the odd calamity, Nancy Pelosi’s PR team issued a terse statement: “The Speaker will not be commenting on this private matter which occurred while she was on the East Coast.”

Or what about when Paul Pelosi was assaulted by a man armed with a hammer during a home break-in in San Francisco later that year? Police arrested the suspect and Pelosi was rushed to the hospital. Many people questioned the very odd circumstances between the attacker and Pelosi – none of which was ever concluded publicly… perhaps appropriately.

Shouldn’t the Pelosi’s be enjoying travel, grandkids, their Napa winery, their circle of friends, their “Golden Years,” and writing books about their fascinating lives?

As we previously reported:

The U.S. House of Representatives, with a total of 435 members from 50 states, has 10 members 80 and older.

The U.S. House of Representatives has 21 members between age 75 and 80.

The U.S. House of Representatives has 108 members between ages 65 and 74.

The U.S. Senate, with 101 members from 50 states, has 7 members 80 and older.

The U.S. Senate has 22 members between the ages of 65 and 70, and 21 members between the ages of 70 and 79.

Remember the Washington D.C. pharmacist who said in 2017 that he fills a surprising amount of Alzheimer’s prescriptions for various members of Congress? While it would be good to know who those congressional members were, most of us can take reasonably educated guesses…

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

School District in Orange County Becomes Latest in California to Approve Transgender Policy

The Orange Unified School District became the latest district in California to approve a transgender notification policy following a packed meeting that grew heated at times Thursday night. 

The policy requires the school to notify parents when their children under the age of 12 request to use different names or pronouns than what is on their birth certificate. 

Prior to the meeting, school board members said they received an email from California Attorney General Rob Bonta threatening to take action to protect student civil rights. Meanwhile, students and their families anxiously awaited the fate of the proposed policy.

It was a packed house with demonstrators spilling into the parking lot. During the meeting, there were several delays and disruptions, along with over three hours of public comment from both sides. 

Despite Bonta’s warning, the policy was approved in a 4-3 vote around 11:30 p.m. to a roar of applause. 

Board members Ana Page, Kris Erickson, and Andrea Yamasaki, who opposed the policy, left the meeting early citing safety concerns.  

Meanwhile, the Chino Valley Unified School District is at the center of an ongoing legal battle with California Attorney General Rob Bonta over the controversial policy. A judge issued a temporary block on Chino Valley’s policy.

Click here to read the full article at Fox 11

Will Trump Win All of California’s Delegates in the Primary? Here’s What Polling Suggests

The former president, along with several other GOP contenders, will head to Southern California later this month

California Republicans’ support for former President Donald Trump appears to be growing, according to a new poll — and that’s a particularly positive sign for his campaign given how the state will assign its bevy of delegates this year.

Trump is the preferred candidate for 55% of likely Republican voters surveyed in late August by the Berkeley Institute of Government Studies — taken after he was indicted in Georgia for alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

That’s an 11% increase from Berkeley IGS’s May survey — and would trigger the California Republican Party’s new rule allotting all of its 169 delegates to whichever candidate can secure a majority (50% plus 1) of the statewide vote in the upcoming primary election.

In comparison, 16% of likely Republican voters picked Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, 7% former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley and 4% tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.

A February Berekely IGS poll found 37% of registered Republican voters preferred DeSantis while 29% preferred Trump.

“Even with all of his legal troubles, former President Donald Trump’s lead in the Republican primary looks more like what one expects to see from an incumbent running for reelection than for a candidate in an open seat,” said IGS co-director Eric Schickler. “While it remains early, it has to frustrate Trump’s opponents that his lead has grown even amid his series of indictments.”

Dan Schnur, who teaches political messaging at USC and UC Berkeley, says the poll shows good news for Trump — as long as he can maintain that support among California’s GOP voters during the March 5 primary.

“The state party clearly did this to help him, but now Iowa and New Hampshire are even more important,” said Schnur, noting the momentum from winning those early primary states coupled with California’s delegates would make Trump “unstoppable.”

CAGOP changed its rules in late July. If no contender can secure a majority, then the delegates — the most from any state — will be distributed proportionally.  Previously, candidates could win three delegates per congressional district, which could lead them to focus on certain pockets of the state.

The change, CAGOP Chair Jessica Millan Patterson said at the time, encourages Republican candidates “to spend real time campaigning in our state and making their case to voters.”

Still, the change was largely seen as a boon to Trump’s quest to return to the White House.

Meanwhile, the Berkeley IGS poll also found President Joe Biden holding a substantial lead over challengers Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Marianne Williamson among both likely Democratic and no party preference voters.

And while Biden holds a 51% to 31% lead over Trump, the survey found 24% of registered voters are “very open” to a potential third party candidate in a Biden-Trump matchup, 23% are “somewhat open” and 17% said it would depend on who the candidate is.

Trump, along with many other presidential contenders, plans to head to Southern California later this month.

The Republican National Committee is holding the second GOP presidential primary debate on Sept. 27 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute in Simi Valley — albeit, it’s not clear if Trump will participate. He skipped the first debate and criticized the presidential library as the venue because the longtime board chair, Frederick Ryan Jr., was the publisher of the Washington Post. (In June, Ryan said he was leaving the Washington Post to lead the new Center on Public Civility at the Reagan Foundation.)

On Sept. 29, Trump and other candidates are slated to speak at the CAGOP fall convention in Anaheim. DeSantis and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott are also scheduled to appear that Friday; Ramaswamy is expected the next day.

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register

CA Senate Passes Bill to Charge Parents With ‘Child Abuse’ for not Affirming Transgenderism in Custody Cases

A 7-year old child has a vivid imagination, believes in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny, and still watches cartoons

Under California’s Assembly Bill 957 by Assemblywoman Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City), a parent could lose custody for not “affirming” or agreeing to a child’s claims about gender identity. This bill just passed the Senate Tuesday.

The bill, co-authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), would require judges adjudicating such disputes over transgender-identifying children to favor the parent who “affirms” the child’s preferred identity.

But even more disturbing, bizarre, and ironic, in the State of California where the policy of California public schools is to keep “gender” information hidden from parents, how could a divorcing parent even know if they are affirming their child’s “gender identity?”

“Affirming a child’s identity about gender is in their best interest,” Assemblywoman Wilson said in a hearing June 9th. Wilson also notes that if you the parent reject your child’s chosen gender, “you are rejecting that child.”

As we reported in June:

“This bill clarifies that a family court, when determining the best interest of the child in a proceeding to determine custody or visitation for a child, shall consider, as part of the consideration of the health, safety, and welfare of the child, a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity,” the 06/09/23- Senate Judiciary bill analysis says.

So imagine a child of parents going through a contentious divorce, feeling confused, responsible for the breakup, and wanting the parents to get back together, announces that she is really a he. Under Wilson’s and Wiener’s bill, the parents must drop everything and provide “gender affirming care.”

We hear stories daily from teachers who report that school-aged kids’ claims of being trans are mostly jumping on the trans bandwagon. It’s an attention-getter. Suddenly they are more popular, in a freaky way, can dress oddly, and get more attention.

To understand the motive behind this radical legislation, the list of sponsors speaks volumes:

This bill is sponsored by the California State PTA, the California TGI Policy Alliance, the EmpowerTHEM Collective, Equality California, Gender Justice Los Angeles, the Los Angeles LGBT Center, TransFamily Support Services, TransYouth Liberation, and the Women’s Foundation of California, and is supported by the California Faculty Association, the California Youth Empowerment Network.

This bill is opposed by Bridge Network, the California Parents Union, California’s Legislative Voice, Carlsbad C2O, the Silicon Valley Association of American Women, Stand Up Sacramento County, and 14 individuals.

Senator Scott Wiener, who is not a parent, added in the mandatory “affirming” language to AB 957.

Once again, the California Legislature is trampling all over parental rights, rather than doing the jobs they were elected to do – govern and public policy. Parenting isn’t listed in the California Legislature’s legislative process. And these hair-brained bills should be summarily rejected by other lawmakers.

As we reported in June, Nicole Pearson, founder of the Facts Law Truth Justice law firm and civil rights advocacy group, condemned AB 957’s unconstitutionality in an interview with The Daily Signal:

This bill makes law that failure to affirm your child’s identity is child abuse. This will be a final, legal determination without any evidence in support, or a hearing with notice or the opportunity to be heard. Assemblywoman Wilson and Senator Scott Wiener are not doctors. They can’t make this determination for every single child aged 0 to 17 in the state and, yet, that is exactly what they’re trying to do here.

If a parent or guardian is unwilling or simply not ready to affirm their 7-year-old’s new identity—as they transition from Spongebob to Batman to Dora the Explorer—they can be found guilty of child abuse under AB-957 if it passes into law.

This is a horrifying bill for children, and for parents and guardians not just in California, but across the country. Gavin Newsom is gunning for president in 2028. If he signs this bill into law, here, it will be headed to every state if he wins.

A 7-year old child has a vivid imagination, believes in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny, and still watches cartoons. Giving that child chemical castration through drugs, or even buying into the opposite gender claims, is child abuse. Like many girls, I was a tomboy, played sports with the boys, climbed trees and got in fights. But I also had a Barbie Dream House and liked to sew my own Barbie clothes. I grew out of the tomboy phase, stopped getting in fights and put away the baseball cap about the same time I gave my Barbie Dream House to the little girl down the street. It was a phase.

Wilson also notes that if you the parent reject your child’s chosen gender, “you are rejecting that child.”

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

Trump poised to sweep state’s delegates in GOP primary

But California voters worry about his and Biden’s vulnerabilities,  a UC Berkeley/Times poll finds.

Former President Trump dominates his rivals so heavily that he’s on track to win all of California’s delegates for next year’s Republican convention — a haul that would give him a major chunk of the votes needed to secure his third presidential nomination.

The finding from a new UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll co-sponsored by The Times highlights a turnabout from earlier this year. In February, Trump faced a serious challenge from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis among California Republicans.

The potential for Trump to win all of the state’s delegates also reflects his campaign’s work to change the rules of the contest to his advantage.

In late July, the California Republican Party changed its rules so that if a candidate wins more than 50% of the statewide vote in the state’s March 5 primary, he or she will claim all 169 GOP delegates — the most of any state in the nation. Previously, the rules allocated delegates by congressional district. A candidate needs just over 1,200 convention delegates to win the nomination.

Trump’s campaign team pushed for the rule change, one of a series of such shifts it has backed in states across the nation. All of the changes supported by his campaign have the effect of helping a front-runner quickly nail down the Republican nomination.

The new poll shows about 55% of likely Republican voters plan to cast their primary ballots for Trump.

DeSantis’ support has plummeted to 16% — less than half of what he had earlier this year.

“Californians have turned away, by and large, from DeSantis,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the UC Berkeley institute’s poll. “The biggest beneficiary of DeSantis’ decline is the former president. There’s no question he’s well-liked by the Republican base.

“It’s a startling development given the fact that over the past year, there appeared to be sentiment among Republicans looking for an alternative to Trump,” DiCamillo added. “That has changed, and Trump is now the odds-on favorite.

“Capturing all of California’s delegates would give Trump a huge advantage over the rest of the field,” he said.

The state party’s rule changes were one factor in the recent decision by a super PAC backing DeSantis to stop major campaign operations in California and several other states, NBC News reported last week.

On the Democratic side, the poll indicated President Biden holds a big lead ahead of California’s primary, with 66% of party voters supporting him, compared with 9% for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and 3% for Marianne Williamson. About 1 in 6 likely Democratic voters said they were undecided.

Biden gets less support from young, Latino and Asian American voters than from white and Black voters. That difference in enthusiasm is unlikely to hurt his chances in California, given his wide lead, but it reflects a problem for the president that could be serious elsewhere in the nation.

Biden also holds a big lead over Trump in a prospective general election matchup in the state, not surprising given California’s cobalt-blue tilt.

Of the state’s 22 million registered voters, 46.9% identify as Democrats, 23.8% as Republicans, 22.5% as no party preference and 6.8% with other parties, according to the California secretary of state’s most recent statistics.

The poll also looked at some important vulnerabilities for each of the two leading candidates.

Among the state’s likely voters, 42% said they believe Biden’s age — he turns 82 shortly after election day — will hurt him a lot in his reelection bid, compared with 32% who think Trump’s legal woes will hurt him a lot in his effort to win back the White House.

Those legal difficulties may be on display just before the state’s primary. On March 4, the former president is scheduled to go on trial in Washington on federal charges that he illegally sought to overturn the results of the 2020 election, which he lost to Biden.

California shares its primary date with Texas, North Carolina and about a dozen other states, which together will allocate more than a third of Republican delegates.

The poll was conducted in late August, shortly after Trump was indicted in Georgia over alleged efforts to overturn the state’s 2020 presidential election results.

It was the fourth indictment for the former president. In addition to the Georgia and federal cases alleging efforts to overturn the election, he also faces federal charges over his handling of confidential government documents after leaving the White House, and New York state charges over payments to a porn actor during the 2016 campaign in an attempt to conceal an alleged affair.

The polling began one day after the first GOP presidential primary debate, which Trump skipped.

The survey’s results affirm the dwindling popularity of DeSantis, who shares many of the same beliefs as Trump, but without the former president’s legal and temperamental baggage. The Florida governor has drawn praise from many on the right for his opposition to lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as for his vocal advocacy of the conservative side in the nation’s culture wars.

In February, when many Republicans were focused on Trump-endorsed candidates’ losses in last year’s midterm election, DeSantis had the support of 37% of likely California GOP voters, while Trump was backed by 29%, according to a Berkeley institute poll.

Three months later, a Berkeley survey indicated the former president had rebounded with the support of 44% of the state’s likely GOP voters and DeSantis trailing at 26%.

Former United Nations Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s performance in the first GOP debate appears to have bumped up her support in the latest poll, though she remains mired in the single digits among likely Republican voters in California.

Haley now has the backing of 7% of the state’s likely GOP voters surveyed, double her support in the February poll. Businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Vice President Mike Pence, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott and conservative talk radio host Larry Elder all trailed behind her. About 9% of the poll’s Republican participants said they supported someone else or were undecided.

Looking ahead at the general election, 51% of the state’s likely voters polled said they would support Biden, the incumbent president, while 31% said they would back Trump. About 13% said they planned to cast ballots for an unnamed third-party candidate, and 5% were undecided.

While California’s general election is unlikely to be competitive — it hasn’t been in the last three decades — voters’ attitudes about each candidate’s potential vulnerabilities provide insight into the overall state of the race.

Neither Trump nor Biden received stellar ratings from voters on their ethical behavior, though the current president outpaced the former; 71% faulted Trump’s personal ethics, compared with 43% who faulted Biden’s.

Nearly half, 47%, of likely California voters surveyed said they would be open to supporting a third-party candidate if the 2024 presidential campaign is a rematch of Biden and Trump’s contest three years ago, with 24% saying they would be “very open” to the idea.

While a candidate not affiliated with either of the nation’s two main political parties has practically zero chance of winning the White House, DiCamillo said those numbers reflect voter frustration, particularly among those who are less ideologically inclined.

“There’s dissatisfaction. We’ve seen that in other polls,” he said. “It appears to be the most moderate voters, not those on the extremes. Strong liberals and strong conservatives are less open to [a third-party candidate] than those in the middle.”

The Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies’ poll surveyed 6,030 registered California voters online in English and Spanish, Aug. 24-29, with weighted samples of 1,175 likely GOP primary voters and 2,833 likely Democratic primary voters.

Click here to read the full article in the LA Times

Lawmakers, Parents Run Out of Patience with CA Leaders on Stalled Punishment for Fentanyl Dealers

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — As California’s Democratic Party-led Legislature continues to be divided on establishing more punishment for illegal fentanyl dealers, a group of Republican lawmakers and a group of parents who have lost loved ones to fentanyl are planning on launching separate efforts Tuesday to address the issue.

At the center of each effort is a proposal that would require courts to notify convicted fentanyl dealers that if they deal again and someone dies, they could face murder charges. Supporters of the measure have noted the advisement is similar to the notice drunk drivers receive once convicted under California law.

The proposed law, also known as Alexandra’s Law, is named after Alexandra Capelouto, a 20-year-old woman from Temecula who died of fentanyl poisoning in 2019. The proposed law was filed by a Republican in the Assembly and a Democrat in the Senate. The Republican’s version was blocked by the Assembly Public Safety Committee in one of its first hearings of the year. The Democrats’ version was blocked twice by the Senate Public Safety Committee.

In the bill’s last hearing, two Democratic lawmakers said they couldn’t support the version written in the Senate, with concerns it wouldn’t stop fentanyl-related deaths and didn’t exactly mirror the state’s advisement for those convicted of driving under the influence. In the Assembly, some lawmakers in the public safety committee said the Republican’s measure was too broad. The leader of the committee, Democratic Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer, said he had concerns about filling up prisons and was interested in a public-health related approach.

The last-minute legislative effort

On Tuesday, Republican lawmakers in the Assembly plan to force Democrats to flex legislative rules to force lawmakers to vote on ACA 12, a proposed ballot initiative to allow voters to ultimately decide whether Alexandra’s Law should go into effect.

Click here to read the full article in KCRA 3

Will California Lawmakers Fall for Fraudulent Study Justifying Unjustified Prison Guard Union Giveaways?

California taxpayers should pay careful attention to the scheme orchestrated by the Newsom administration to further enrich his political cronies at the California Correctional Peace Officers Association.

Under California law, the state of California is required to conduct compensation studies in order to determine the appropriateness of general raises for public employees.

Prior to this year, the last publicly released compensation study for California’s prison guards was from 2013. According to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office that compensation study determined “that state correctional officers were compensation 40.2% above their local government counterparts and 28.1% above their federal government counterparts.”

Ever since, the state has dragged its feet in completing and referencing these legally required studies.

In 2018, Gavin Newsom was elected governor with the support of the CCPOA.

In 2020, the CCPOA ousted one of its most prominent critics in the California Legislature, Republican Sen. John Moorlach, helping to elect compliant Democrat Dave Min.

In 2021, the CCPOA dumped millions to defend him from recall. That same year, over the objections of the LAO pointing out the lack of a compensation study, the California Legislature, including Min, uncritically voted to give the CCPOA a lucrative new contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars per year.

That contract is now up.

The LAO is raising alarm bells once again about how the state is trying to justify a lucrative new contract for the CCPOA.

For one, the state’s HR department has concocted a deliberately misleading compensation study using different methodology and comparison groups designed to make the CCPOA-represented prison guards look underpaid.

The LAO notes a number of problems with the Newsom administration’s compensation study. It deliberately compared the pay of prison guards to law enforcement employees in high cost-of-living counties where few prison guards actually work and even two counties where zero prison guards work.

The LAO also notes the study conveniently omitted overtime pay, “which is equivalent to roughly 24 percent of gross regular pay in 2022,” and “mischaracterizes the value of pension and retiree health benefits.”

For these reasons and more, the LAO is advising the Legislature not to even reference the study.

The LAO brings to light other very useful information. Like the fact that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has to turn away more than 90% of qualified applicants for the prison guard academy, which indicates that at current levels of compensation there are more than enough people willing to do the job. No general raises needed.

The LAO also notes that compared to 2013, “the share of state correctional officer positions that are vacant” has also gone down. This, too, indicates there’s no actual problem bringing prison guards on to the job.

And as for handwaving from the CCPOA about retention problems, the LAO points out “the average Unit 6 member is younger today than they were in 2013. To some extent, this may reflect recent rates of retirement.”

Despite this, the Newsom administration wants to reward his cronies at CCPOA.

This is yet another test voters should use to gauge who in the Legislature is truly representing them and who is willing to play political games over public service.

There is no reason to throw more money at CCPOA. None.

For comparison, consider this question from watchdog group Govern for California: “Do our elected state officials really believe that California should spend twice as much on the compensation and benefits of 64,937 [correctional] employees as it spends on the 450,000 students served by California State University?”

Click here to read the ful article in the Orange County Register