California Tea Party
April 19, 2010
SF Politician Helps Few at the Expense of Many
April 18, 2010
On April 5, Assemblywoman Julia Brownley changed an existing bill on summary judgments to one that restricts the collection of delinquent assessments. The modified bill raises the threshold for foreclosure from $1,800/12 months to $3,600/18 months.
Good Intentions. Ms. Brownley undoubtedly has good intentions–protecting financially stressed owners from foreclosure. Unfortunately, she is doing so at the expense of everyone else. If associations cannot collect delinquent assessments, their budgets will fall short. To compensate for the drop in revenues, boards have only two options, (i) delay much-needed repairs or (ii) raise dues to make up for lost revenue.
Law of Unintended Consequences. Boards already face threats of litigation from owners impacted by deferred maintenance. If they cut back on maintenance to avoid raising dues, damage from increased roof leaks and plumbing backups will result in expensive litigation and higher insurance premiums. If boards raise dues to pay for higher legal/insurance expenses or alternatively raise dues to avoid litigation, they risk pushing more owners into foreclosure/bankruptcy. Ms. Brownley’s good intentions will have the unintended consequence of actually increasing foreclosures.
Embarrassing Owners. Ms. Brownley did two more things I find troubling. She requires that payment plans for financially stressed owners be (i) negotiated with the entire board rather and (ii) approved in open session. Requiring a meeting with the full board instead of a representative will delay approval of plans since boards meet monthly and not everyone is always available. Moreover, the already embarrassed owner must explain to a panel of five or more neighbors (depending on the size of the board) why they cannot pay their bills. Finally, the payment plan must then be approved by the board in open session in front of even more neighbors. The embarrassment of the process may deter owners from seeking payment plans, thereby increasing foreclosures.
RECOMMENDATION. There are better ways to deal with this problem than pushing even more owners over a financial cliff and increasing the litigation risk to associations. I recommend contacting Assemblywoman Julia Brownley and politely asking her to withdraw AB 2502. In addition, use CLAC’s sample letter on your own letterhead and fax it to Assembly Housing Committee members, by close of business Tuesday (April 20) if you want to be listed as an opponent.
Sincerely yours,
Adrian Adams, Esq.
Adams Kessler PLC
The Party of No – OPINION
March 30, 2010
Look at some of the things they have tried to outlaw or legislate out of existence in order to say no to freedom and personal choice.
- No to health care choice (everyone must now have health coverage or pay a fine). As we know, health insurance companies will be “starved” out of existence by having to compete with a government entity that doesn’t have to earn a profit. Experts say they have about 3 years before the government will be forced to step in and offer a public option… something Obama and Pelosi wanted from the beginning.
- No to following the immigration laws that are on the books with amnesty.
- No to smoking and tobacco products, though look at all the entitlement programs that are being funded by the taxes levied on them. What happens when everyone finally stops smoking? Where will the money for those programs come then? (If you are patting your wallet right now, you would be correct.)
- No to gun ownership, but I am told that even the most liberal of our representatives (Woolsey, Boxer, Feinstein and Pelosi) all have carry permits. I wonder if there is a way to get this information through the Freedom of Information Act? Of course, as we also know from our reading, the rules apply to us, not to them. That’s why there is a push to get a 28th amendment passed.
- No to trans-fats (Democrats in some states have passed this ban) as if trans-fats are the only thing that are making us unhealthy. And as if we will live forever anyway.
- No to salt (Same as above) which has been responsible for high blood pressure. You’d think politicians, knowing the health care system will be overburdened, would welcome death in any form… Sorry if this is politically incorrect!
- No to fast food, especially for children. We have an obesity problem. Does anyone else wonder when poor people are shown on the television they are all overweight? I usually associate poor with malnourished. I guess being fat doesn’t make you nourished. But it certainly doesn’t make you a Biafran baby either.
- No to choice of vehicles people drive as in the case of trying to raise mileage standards so as to put SUV and big car manufacturers out of business. Everyone should be driving an electric car… however, where will we plug them in if they won’t develop nuclear, let us burn coal, dam up rivers for hydroelectric. We saw what happened to Boone Pickens’ wind farm experiment. Even with government subsidies, he has given up!
- Here in Marin, they are saying No to PG and E in order to set up a second tier bureaucracy to run our power systems. Remember, PG and E is already regulated by the Public Utilities Commission. Now they want to lay another level of red tape on top which they “say” will lower our costs. Remember, PG and E will still have to manage their resources for the Marin group, so where will the cost savings come from? And what business has the government run right? I asked that question last week and am still waiting for an answer.
- No to petroleum.
- No to nuclear power.
- No to coal.
- No to hyrdroelectric.
- No to LOWER TAXES.
The list could go on. Any time liberals and “moderate” Republicans get an idea of what’s best for us (as in John McCain’s bill to control supplements) they are saying no to Freedom! To buy Sudafed I have to give them my driver’s license so they can record my name. It’s the same with many other so-called “over the counter” medication. Are they over the counter or not?
Make no mistake, reasonable people of all parties understand the process of how our economy works, and they are well aware that saying no to the free enterprise system only hurts our country. I have talked to several people who are leaving the health care industry while they can to find a job in another sector before there is a mass exodus from the sinking ship. After all, we have seen the kind of people who end up working for the government… which is what the health care industry will become, a wholly owned and run government program.
So when you run into that rabid liberal who starts calling you the party of no, lay into them with some of these facts or any others you can come up with. It may not change their mind, but you might feel better knowing the facts are on our side.
- FedUpEditor
Rent Board Announces Annual Allowable Rent Increase
March 24, 2010
The San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Board has announced that the annual allowable rent increase for the March 1, 2010 to February 28, 2011 period is .1 percent. The interest rate payable on tenant security deposits for the same period is .9 percent. For further information, visit the Rent Board’s web site at www.sfgov.org/site/rentboard_index.asp.
- SFAR
Note: Liberal San Francisco law says landlords must pay tenants 0.9 percent interest on deposits held while landlords can only earn less than nothing in a savings account. Any wonder why people go out of the rental busines in rent controlled cities? – FedUpEditor
Rachel Maddow to Challenge Scott Brown in Mass.
March 23, 2010
Note: If anyone ever tells you there is no media bias toward liberals, give them this example. – FedUpEditor
From the desk of Scott Brown: It’s only been a couple of months since I’ve been in office, and before I’ve even settled into my new job, the political machine in Massachusetts is looking for someone to run against me. And you’re not going to believe who they are supposedly trying to recruit — liberal MSNBC anchor Rachel Maddow.
Rachel lives in western Massachusetts, and recently it was reported that the chairman of the state Democratic Party had apparently tried to reach out to her in an attempt to coax her into a race against me. You can read about it here.
The political season never ends, which is why I need your continued support. While my opponents strategize on how to defeat me in 2012, I’m going to continue to speak out against higher taxes, more spending and greater government control in our lives.
I relish being an independent voice in Washington, one that doesn’t march in lockstep with the rest of the Washington crowd. The Democratic Party bosses in Massachusetts disagree. They want a rubberstamp who will vote for their plans to expand government, increase debt and raise taxes. Someone like Rachel Maddow. I’m sure she’s a nice person — I just don’t think America can afford her liberal politics.
Rachel Maddow has a nightly platform to push her far-left agenda. What about you? I’d like to encourage ordinary American citizens concerned about the future of their country to get more involved in our government. I hope you were encouraged by my victory to become more politically active, maybe even become a candidate for office yourself. We can continue to push our movement forward by running for office, joining in rallies and petitions that challenge President Obama and Nancy Pelosi’s healthcare legislation, supporting campaigns against the tax-and-spenders or by donating time and money to office-holders and candidates who will restore the principles of our founders.
I’m grateful you are with me. Thanks again for whatever support you can provide me, and I look forward to joining in further victories with you down the line.
Sincerely,
Scott Brown
United States Senator
States Move to Exempt Themselves from Health Care
March 22, 2010
North Carolina: I’m sure you share my outrage and disgust at the actions of the Democrat-controlled Congress, as last night they took an unprecedented step that tramples on the individual freedoms of Americans.
Although things appear to be grim, there are still a few rays of hope. One of them is the legislative leadership of the North Carolina Republican Party.
This past January, Senate Republican Leader Phil Berger and House Republican Leader Skip Stam announced their plans for the Health Care Protection Act, which will protect an individual’s right to make decisions about their own health coverage and ensure that North Carolina citizens are not subject to the mandates of the federal health care plan.
This will be Republicans’ first priority if elected into the majority during the November elections. We encourage you to view the web video below that champions this legislative initiative. After you view the video, we hope you’ll contact your North Carolina legislators today and encourage them to support this important act. Most importantly, we ask you to pass this message on to your email list so North Carolina voters know that we still have options and that the North Carolina Republican Party is committed to the Constitution and individual liberty.
Sincerely,
Tom Fetzer
NCGOP Chairman
Here’s Why California Will Fail!
March 12, 2010
A Liberal View of Chuck DeVore
March 9, 2010
Jim Judd for Congress – California 6th District
March 5, 2010
Thoughts on Big Government:
Most people don’t realize the extent to which big government negatively affects us as individuals and as a country. Many of the programs created by our legislators seem compassionate on the surface. But when we look deeper, we see that all these well-meaning entitlements have actually hurt the United States and our economy, not just today, but well into the future. As an example of the “Too Big to Fail” mentality, we see “Big Government’s” continued debt doubling down by propping up private businesses, something our government should not be doing.
Here’s my point. In the 80s, American businesses were getting their butts kicked by Japan in all areas of the private sector; most notably manufacturing and specifically in the automobile industry. Japan was the leader in quality improvements, efficiency, and increased productivity. What happened was a change in corporate attitude by U.S. businesses that led to one of our biggest booms in the 90s, where we set the pace in the free market and broke the back of the Soviet Union as well. Remember that one? To accomplish this boom, government stepped back, allowing business the opportunity to succeed in creating an environment based on confidence. Consumers felt confident, as did investors. And who won?…Americans. Jobs where plentiful and, oh boy, we sure could use those jobs today!
Here’s the other side of the coin. Today we are embroiled in three issues that do not speak to the competitive advantage discussed above, but instead continue down the path to becoming more regulated by government. These sectors are energy, health care and education. All three are resistant to the culture of free market competition and have become heavily regulated by “Big Government”. Take a look at the Energy Department with a budget of $24.7 billion. Are we more reliant on foreign oil or less? Are we any closer to innovative alternative fuels without them being taxpayer subsidized? And what about Government Health Care? What will happen when we see one sixth of our economy in the hands of “Big Government,” running it like Amtrak or the USPS? We have the Department of Education with a $63.5 billion budget. How’s that working for us, or should I say, for our children? These questions beg the obvious. “Big Government” needs to get out of the way and let the free market work in new and innovative ways. Not to do so will never allow Americans to feel the confidence we need (remember I said it earlier) to invest in America and in our future. “Big Government” and big entitlement programs will only lead to a nation of dependence and a culture of government elitism.
It would seem that the business of our government is to create more government. In fact, the only sector that has grown during this recession was the Public Sector, i.e., government jobs. And a USA Today report shows that in one year, six-figure government salaries fast became the norm under this current administration. Remember, government jobs put back into the economy only what is left from the taxes it first has taken out of the economy. Government does not create wealth; the Private Sector is where wealth is truly created. Individuals and businesses, big and small, are pulling the cart. Now, while many of us are figuring out ways to cut back and do with less, our government is riding high and giving itself raises like there is no tomorrow.
People are finally starting to realize that the system is broken, and it is time for someone to fix it before it is too late. We have relied on countless numbers of career politicians to solve these problems, and we still are waiting. Instead of listening to their constituents, they seem to think their jobs are about getting re-elected.
Now is the time to put people in office with real life experience, ones who REALLY know how to create jobs. It is time we stood together and put our trust in some new faces. When I am elected, my pledge is to represent YOU. Partisan politics will be a thing of the past. I will consider each bill on its merit and how it will best benefit the people in my district. I promise to work hard, speak up and change the way things get done in Washington. You have my word.
- Jim Judd
www.JimJuddForCongress.com
UP Time!
February 24, 2010
