radiofree.asia

Category: california

  • Our Drug Rehab Investigation Led to 96 Convictions and Millions in Restitution

    Dr. Howard Oliver was once a prolific rehab doctor, signing off on taxpayer-funded drug addiction treatment for more than 1,500 people without ever seeing most of them – because, as he said, even “a brick can undergo counseling.”

    He was a key figure in a cesspool of fraud uncovered by The Center for Investigative Reporting and CNN in an investigation that documented rampant cheating and a glaring lack of state oversight in California’s rehab system for the poor.

    Now, Oliver’s in prison, sentenced to serve more than seven years.

    His conviction is a capstone of a sweeping yearslong criminal crackdown on fraudulent rehab clinics prompted directly by the 2013 CIR/CNN investigation. 

    All told, the California attorney general’s office has charged 144 people associated with 49 rehab clinics, resulting in 96 convictions and more than $4 million in restitution ordered so far, according to agency records. A few cases are still pending. 

    The 96 convictions don’t include any patients. Almost all were owners or employees of rehab clinics. Several of the clinic operators featured in the series have now been prosecuted and convicted. The agency declined to comment.

    The convictions bar clinic operators and staff indefinitely from billing Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid system, though they can apply to be reinstated, according to the state Department of Health Care Services.

    Oliver served as medical director for several of the clinics caught up in the sweep, but one in particular led to his downfall. Prosecutors said Oliver helped West Coast Counseling Center in Los Angeles steal $2.8 million from Medi-Cal. 

    Here’s how the scheme worked: The clinic bribed people with free bus passes and gift cards in exchange for copies of their Medi-Cal ID cards, according to court records. Clinic staff would then use those ID cards to manufacture fake patient charts, counseling notes and sign-in sheets for counseling sessions that never happened. Oliver signed off on all the treatment, even after staff told him repeatedly that he was approving counseling for fake patients, prosecutors said. The clinic billed the government for it all, raking in millions, instead of providing actual services to real people struggling with addiction. 

    In addition to Oliver, three other West Coast Counseling leaders were convicted.

    “The leadership of West Coast Counseling was trusted to provide vital services to people in their community who were battling addiction,” Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement announcing Oliver’s sentencing in December. “Instead, they set up the facility to steal taxpayer money and diverted millions from state resources to their own gain.”

    Oliver’s attorney in that case, Stephen Bolinger, said Oliver disputed that anyone had told him the clinic was billing for “ghost patients” and is appealing the conviction.

    “His stance is that he was basically made a patsy,” Bolinger said. “He trusted people he shouldn’t have trusted.” 

    The CIR/CNN investigation, based on thousands of pages of government records, dozens of interviews and undercover surveillance, showed that the state of California had been pouring tens of millions of dollars into dozens of clinics despite blatant signs of fraud. The state allowed people who should have been barred from the system – including a man convicted of organized crime – to operate crooked taxpayer-funded clinics. Some clinics fabricated counseling notes and billed for ghost clients who never came in. Others padded client rolls by diagnosing teenagers with addictions they didn’t have or taking advantage of mentally ill residents of board-and-care homes, luring them in with cigarettes and cash. 

    Even when regulators caught the clinics cheating, the government kept doling out public funds.

    When state officials declined interview requests, CNN approached the secretary of California’s Health and Human Services Agency outside a public meeting in June 2013, where she tried to flee from reporters and called for security. Soon after, the state launched a crackdown, which led to the convictions.

    Back then, Oliver served as medical director to many of the suspect rehab clinics, despite a history of run-ins with regulators. When reporters approached Oliver about his role, he didn’t shy away. Oliver invited reporters to tour West Coast Counseling Center, which he considered a good clinic. There, when asked how he approved treatment for patients without seeing them, some of whom may not even exist, Oliver said, “Well, I don’t know that they don’t exist.”

    Eight years after CIR and CNN exposed his practices, a jury convicted Oliver of felony Medi-Cal fraud, conspiracy, grand theft and tax evasion, among other charges. In December, he was sentenced to seven years and eight months in state prison. His medical license was suspended.

    He’ll be eligible for parole in 2025.

    Will Evans can be reached at wevans@revealnews.org. Follow him on Twitter: @willCIR.

    Our Drug Rehab Investigation Led to 96 Convictions and Millions in Restitution is a story from Reveal. Reveal is a registered trademark of The Center for Investigative Reporting and is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization.

    This post was originally published on Reveal.

  • A California police department offered gas money for unwanted guns. It ran out in under one hour.

    By: RACHEL TREISMAN

    See original post here.

    When the police department in Sacramento, Calif., held a gun buyback event on Saturday, they didn’t just give residents a no-questions-asked chance to turn in their unwanted firearms: They also gave out gift cards for gas.

    The Sacramento Police Department said on Facebook that 134 people had dropped off firearms in exchange for $50 gas gift cards. The day’s collections included at least one assault weapon, components of privately manufactured “ghost guns” and “multiple other illegally configured firearms,” they said.

    While the gift cards appear to have been an incentive – especially with gas prices climbing across the country – officials said they weren’t the only motivating factor.

    “Among other reasons, community members most commonly cited a lack of experience or knowledge with firearms, lack of knowledge of the legality of the firearms, or an inability to safely store the firearms as the main reasons for participating in the exchange,” they wrote.

    Whatever the reason, Saturday’s event – which was supposed to last for five hours – got more takers than expected. The department announced just 45 minutes into the event that it had exhausted its supply of gift cards “due to overwhelming response” and would be stopping an hour early.

    It continued to accept firearms even after running out of gift cards, with officials praising the event as a success.

    “I truly believe violent crime prevention is a shared responsibility and today’s overwhelming community participation is evidence of the success we can achieve together,” said Sacramento Police Chief Kathy Lester.

    Cities across the U.S. hold gun buybacks (typically offering some sort of incentive) with the overall goal of reducing gun violence in their communities – though research suggests these programs don’t quite accomplish that.

    Sacramento wasn’t the only city to host a fruitful buyback over the weekend. New York City officials said that people turned a total of 69 weapons in to a Brooklyn church on Saturday, at an event co-sponsored by cheesecake chain Junior’s Restaurant.

    People turning in rifles, shotguns and air guns got $25 bank cards, according to Forbes, while those turning in assault rifles or handguns got a $200 bank card and an iPad.

    The post A California police department offered gas money for unwanted guns. It ran out in under one hour. appeared first on Basic Income Today.

    This post was originally published on Basic Income Today.

  • United States: Uvalde school shooting exposes violent gun culture, endemic racism

    The mass shooting of students and teachers at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas has brought the issue of gun control and racism to the world’s attention again, reports Malik Miah.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Texas Reps Have Taken Over $14 Million From Gun Rights Groups

    Texas representatives in the 117th Congress took more money from gun rights groups than lawmakers in any other state, a new OpenSecrets analysis found.

    Senators and House members representing Texas have received more than $14 million in contributions from gun rights interests over the course of their careers, with much of that coming from the National Rifle Association.

    Texas also ranks second among the 19 states tracked by OpenSecrets for state-level lobbying by gun rights groups with more than $3 million in spending from 2015 through 2021. During that period, the NRA spent more on state-level lobbying in Texas than any other state in the 19 states tracked by OpenSecrets with over $2.5 million in spending.

    The influence gun rights groups exert in Texas is also evident in grassroots organizing and advocacy efforts spearheaded by the NRA.

    The NRA is holding its annual meeting this weekend in Houston — just a few hours drive from the elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, where at least 19 children and two teachers were killed in a shooting on Tuesday.

    Multiple politicians are slated to speak at the event, which is expected to be the year’s largest for the gun lobby after previous events were canceled due to the coronavirus pandemic.

    Some of the convention’s planned headliners — including Texas Gov. Greg Abbott — canceled in-person appearances after facing criticism for taking money from the NRA and continuing with plans to speak at the event after the shooting. Abbott is still scheduled to address attendees in a pre-recorded video message.

    The NRA convention schedule also still includes multiple in-person appearances from politicians who have benefited from the gun rights group’s largesse, including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and former President Donald Trump.

    Trump is scheduled to headline a forum at the NRA’s annual meeting, and the NRA issued a notice telling attendees they will not be able to carry firearms, toy guns or “weapons of any kind” during the forum headlined by Trump.

    Trump’s presidential election bids received significant financial support from the NRA. The gun rights group spent a record $54.4 million on 2016 federal elections, with most of that spending routed through the NRA’s flagship lobbying arm, a 501(c)(4) “dark money” group that does not disclose its donors. Nearly all of the NRA’s 2016 spending went to boosting Trump’s presidential election.

    Though tax records show the main NRA lobbying arm’s revenue dipped down to about $282 million in 2020 after ending multiple years in the red, the group still poured tens of millions of dollars into influencing elections. Most of the $29 million that the NRA spent on 2020 federal elections also went to supporting Trump in the final months before Election Day.

    Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who is slated to speak at the NRA’s annual meeting, is the top recipient of political contributions from gun rights interests, drawing about $749,000 over his career.

    Gun rights interests have also poured money into outside spending boosting Cruz. Of the more than $154,000 gun rights interests spent boosting Cruz since he was elected to Congress in 2012, about $122,000 was bankrolled by the NRA.

    The NRA event schedule includes a prerecorded video message from Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican with a long history with the gun rights advocacy organization. Abbot has received more than $20,000 in contributions from gun rights groups with most of that coming from the NRA and the Texas State Rifle Association.

    In June 2021, multiple members of NRA leadership — embattled NRA chief executive Wayne LaPierre and NRA president Carolyn Meadows — joined Abbott for a special bill signing ceremony for House Bill 1927, NRA-backed legislation that allows Texans to carry handguns for self-defense without a license from the state so long as they don’t have a criminal history.

    Texas’ Republican attorney general, Ken Paxton, is still scheduled to speak at the event.

    Paxton won the GOP nomination Tuesday in a runoff against Texas Land Commissioner George P. Bush, the son of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. In November, Paxton will face off against Rochelle Garza, a civil rights attorney who won the Democratic nomination.

    As he runs for reelection, Paxton is under indictment for felony securities fraud charges from 2015 but has pleaded not guilty and is still awaiting trial. In addition to the felony charges, Paxton is also reportedly under FBI investigation for accusations of corruption and the State Bar of Texas is considering whether to take action against Paxton for his role in filing a lawsuit challenging presidential election results in four states won by President Joe Biden. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

    After the shooting, Paxton suggested arming teachers as a possible solution.

    Paxton is a longtime champion of the firearms industry, and the industry in turn has poured money into supporting the controversial politician.

    The NRA, the Texas State Rifle Association and the Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund have all given political contributions to Paxton.

    But Paxton’s relationship with gun rights interests goes far beyond money.

    Paxton “welcomed” the NRA to Texas when the gun rights organization ​​filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in January of 2021, seeking to restructure in Texas and avoid legal action in New York. New York’s attorney general began investigating the National Rifle Association on corruption charges in 2019 and moved to dissolve its 501(c)(4) nonprofit in 2020.

    “The NRA has been instrumental in defending our Second Amendment rights and we would welcome them with open arms to relocate in Texas!,” Paxton tweeted at the time.

    In April, Paxton signed on to an amicus brief supporting the NRA’s petition in partnership with the California Rifle and Pistol Association asking the Supreme Court to hear Duncan v. Bonta, a case challenging California’s ban on magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds.

    Gun Money Across Party Lines

    Contributions from gun rights groups in the Lone Star State are not limited to Republicans.

    Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) is one Democratic incumbent who has a history with the NRA.

    Cuellar faced progressive challenger Jessica Cisneros on Tuesday in Texas’ primary. While Cuellar declared victory, his lead was less than 200 votes and ballots are still being counted so the race may be headed for a runoff. The winning Democrat will go up against Cassy Garcia, a former aide to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) who won her own runoff in the Republican primary Tuesday.

    The NRA has poured tens of thousands of dollars into donations to Cuellar and outside spending boosting Cuellar since he was elected to Congress, totaling $31,669 since 2002.

    Most recently, Cuellar’s 2018 reelection campaign accepted $6,950 in donations from the NRA Political Victory Fund. A campaign spokesperson told CNBC that Cuellar doesn’t plan on giving the NRA’s money back or to charity, reportedly asking, “Why would he do that?”

    Cuellar held an A rating with the NRA going into the 2018 midterms and was one of only three Democrats who received campaign contributions from the NRA that cycle. But his rating dropped from an A to a C after he backed an expansion of background checks. The NRA has not given to him since the 2018 election cycle.

    Both Sides of the Gun Control Debate Spend Big in California

    California ranks No. 1 for members of Congress taking money from groups advocating gun control with $968,754 in contributions over the course of their careers but lawmakers in the state have taken money from groups on both sides of the issue.

    As two of the biggest states in the country, California and Texas each have more representatives in Congress than any other state, meaning more lawmakers in the states may already be more likely to cumulatively attract more money.

    But many individual lawmakers in these states are also major recipients of funds from gun groups, and the states were the two top targets of lobbying spending by gun rights interests in the 19 states tracked by OpenSecrets.

    California ranks second among the 19 states tracked by OpenSecrets for most money spent on lobbying by the NRA from 2015 through 2021 and first overall for gun rights groups lobbying during that time period. Gun rights groups spent over $2.1 million on lobbying in California from 2015 through 2021 with $811,899 of that spending bankrolled by the NRA.

    California lawmakers recently advanced a package of gun control bills, including one sponsored by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom that uses the structure of Texas’ abortion ban to crack down on illegal firearms.

    Newsom opened the legislative session this year with a call to action inspired by Texas Republicans and the conservative majority on the nation’s highest court.

    The law would give Californians the right to sue manufacturers, sellers and distributors of illegal assault weapons, ghost guns and certain firearms and to collect at least $10,000 in civil damages per weapon — effectively putting a bounty on guns.

    Other gun proposals in California include bills to ban the advertising of certain firearms to minors, require school officials to report any “perceived threat” of a mass shooting to law enforcement, ban firearm sales on government property and compel firearm dealers to increase security.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • As COVID Outbreaks Hit California Schools, Most Aren’t Reinstating Mask Mandates

    A fourth-grade camping trip led to one outbreak, a high school prom to another. But even with covid cases rising as schools head into the final stretch of the academic year, most California districts have not moved toward reinstating mask mandates.

    That stance has left many parents confused and concerned as they witness or hear about covid outbreaks among students after field trips and proms.

    Up and down California, school administrators are running out the clock, hoping to outrace the outbreaks. The Berkeley school system and a few others have reversed their mask-optional policies, and the San Diego district sent letters to parents warning that masks could be reinstated if cases continue to rise. But most districts — including those in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Oakland — haven’t revisited their guidance as summer draws near.

    “I do not plan on making any new recommendations in the final three weeks of school,” Dublin Unified Superintendent Chris Funk told KHN, noting that the Alameda County Public Health Department lifted mandatory masking rules in classrooms more than two months ago.

    Among other factors, administrators are reluctant to expose districts to legal challenges. From the start, the attempt to create statewide covid protocols for schools was met with sometimes-fierce resistance. Some districts, many of them rural, ignored California’s school mask mandate. In February, the Roseville Joint Union High School District, which enrolls about 12,000 students in Placer and Sacramento counties, dropped the mask rule even as a statewide mandate remained in effect.

    Another reason that schools aren’t rushing back to masking, several administrators told KHN, is that even though cases are rising, most districts follow county guidelines that tie public health precautions to either the number of covid hospitalizations or the strain they would put on local health systems. Hospital admission rates tend to lag positive case rates by two weeks. Still, hospitalizations remain low for now, likely because of the availability of vaccines and antiviral treatments.

    “We should be past mask mandates, period,” said Dr. Jeanne Noble, who directs covid emergency response at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center. She said that the virus no longer poses a significant health risk to young and vaccinated populations and that people need to adjust to living with covid. That means taking a “test-to-treat” approach, she said, rather than trying to prevent transmission. The Biden administration is moving to a model where patients are tested and then treated with antiviral pills such as Pfizer’s Paxlovid or Merck’s molnupiravir to lower their risk of going to the hospital.

    “I know my advice sounds scary to many, but covid is here to stay,” Noble said. “That is the endgame.”

    That can be a tough sell for some parents.

    When 40 out of 100 fourth graders at Deterding Elementary in the San Juan Unified School District in Sacramento County contracted covid after sharing cabins during a sleep-away field trip, the school was overwhelmed by inquiries from parents of students in other grades wondering whether the health rules at school were about to change — and whether the fifth-grade camping trip, scheduled for June 1, would go on.

    It will, although the district will monitor local conditions and public health guidance, according to Raj Rai, the district’s communications director.

    Some parents were confused or upset by the news that the fifth grade trip would remain on schedule, even though the district was following county health recommendations. Melanie Allen, the Deterding principal, said such confusion has been a common theme during a school year marked by shifting public health guidelines.

    “Even though information was posted clearly by the district on the website, parents reached out constantly to school administrators to clarify next steps for exposure or positive results,” the principal wrote in an email to KHN.

    The rising case rates forced the Berkeley district to make a late reconsideration — it reinstated mandatory masking in classrooms from May 23 until the end of its school year, on June 3. Superintendent Brent Stephens noted in an update on the district’s website that in addition to the spiking student infection numbers, the district could find substitutes for only about half of its absent teachers. District administrators, he said, are working in classrooms to cover the shifts. The city’s chief public health officer strongly recommended the move back to mandatory masking.

    “As we are not a health agency, we must rely on these experts to guide us,” Stephens wrote.

    Very few of California’s more than 1,000 school districts have joined the Berkeley system in making such a decision. On May 16, school officials in Pacific Grove, near Monterey, ordered that masks be worn inside all classrooms by its roughly 2,000 students. Katrina Powley, the district nurse, said the district is one of the few that ties its masking policy to case rates in Monterey County. Therefore, when those rates moved from “low” to “moderate” transmission, a mask mandate was triggered.

    The board of trustees for the San Mateo Union High School District voted in early May to extend its mask mandate until June 1 and strengthened protocols after a prom that was held in San Francisco in April resulted in an outbreak among 90 of the 600 students in attendance.

    Those districts remain in the minority despite the statewide covid surge. Roughly 20 schools in Marin County experienced outbreaks in early May. And the Dublin school district, in the East Bay, saw rates shoot up fivefold from March to April and continue to rise in May. Those schools haven’t revisited their optional mask policies.

    Schools in Davis, in Yolo County, have not reinstated mask requirements despite rising cases, in large part because the county health director decoupled mandates from test positivity rates.

    “We have sufficient protection against the virus, especially with Paxlovid available at test-to-treat locations,” said John Fout, a spokesperson for the county. Only increased hospitalizations straining the health care system would prompt a change, he added.

    At this point, an uptick in serious illnesses may not be recognized until after the school year ends — and that is what many school administrators appear to be counting on.

    This story was produced by KHN, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.

    KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • In Debates Over Prison Closures, Don’t Prioritize “Economic Impact” Over Lives

    When a prison closes, mainstream reporting often obscures the truth from public view. This has certainly been the case for the planned closure of California Correctional Center (CCC) in Susanville. Articles tend to focus on what’s going on in the minds of local people who have sued the state to stop the prison from closing at the end of June. It seems that some Susanville residents believe that propping up their economy through the caging of human beings — like the two of us, who are incarcerated in CCC — is justifiable.

    Many of the free residents of Susanville feel victimized, stories in The New York Times and The San Francisco Chronicle tell us. They think that prison closure is “punishment” by Gov. Gavin Newsom for their conservative politics. In reality, when a prison closes, the town where it sits has a chance at redemption. Redemption is the opposite of punishment. Let us be clear: the people who are being punished are those of us locked inside CCC’s cages. In 2015, the Office of the Inspector General released a special report detailing a “culture of racism” in Susanville’s rural prisons that fosters terrible abuse.

    We, the incarcerated residents of Susanville, filed three petitions in 2021 citing various examples of harm inflicted upon us by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), making the need for CCC’s expedited closure urgent and imperative. Our petitions describe unconscionable abuses of authority; unconstitutional living conditions; deliberate indifference to COVID-19; and Susanville’s violation of our rights, by using us as product and property for the benefit of its own economic growth.

    Susanville — often referred to by residents as “the village” — doesn’t get to keep profiting from prisons just because its inhabitants fear the loss of their most recent state-sponsored economy, one of many in the town’s history. We see and understand prison closure as the best route to a safe, just and sustainable future for us all.

    We are disturbed by the reports of business owners’ hand-wringing, like people who fear Susanville hotels will close if there are no visiting families of incarcerated people to exploit. It’s understandable that free residents would be concerned about potential job loss, but it’s wrong that business special interest groups are funding the push to keep the prison open. If Susanville’s free residents cannot sustain their town without depending on a system that criminalizes and cages human beings, they ought to be rethinking how their economy is organized, and work to make some big changes. We refuse to believe that the only way to “sustain” an economy is to cage and torture human beings.

    Meanwhile, despite the lawsuit stalling the prison closure process, CCC is operating as though it’s already shutting down. As we write, there are no functional rehabilitative programs. Newer prison guards, known as cadets, are refusing to work at CCC and at least 30 guards transferred out in March. Intentional and manufactured staff shortages are to blame for many of the extremely poor conditions. Staff retaliation persists in the form of false write-ups, often resulting in years being added to people’s sentences.

    On the surface, “staff shortages” are no great loss — correctional officers operating a racist prison enforce rules inconsistently while thinking they are above the law. But it does mean that we have been left to suffer the conditions of an understaffed, nonoperational prison at its worst, with no planned releases connected to CCC’s closure.

    Rather than reading more stories about the woes of the town’s free residents, it’s well past time that Governor Newsom and all Californians hear from us, the imprisoned population of Susanville. Our abuse continues and could escalate the longer this closure is stalled. That’s why we are asking anyone reading this to support CCC’s expedited closure.

    Some think certain prisons could be prioritized for closure over others, and that’s true — but we must recognize there is no “wrong” prison to close, and the more that are quickly shut down, the better. Governor Newsom could also be smarter about implementing prison closures by articulating a substantive plan for closing more prisons that emphasizes the importance of community investment. Resources must be allocated to address the lack of equality in today’s economy, especially for Black and formerly incarcerated populations. We need to create jobs that heal all our struggling communities and invest in the people who need the most support. That is what real public safety looks like.

    Closing CCC, a six-decade-old facility requiring $503 million in repairs, will save Californians at least $173 million in staffing costs per year. We can put some of that money back into the town of Susanville, creating much-needed jobs to fight fires and take care of the local environment. But this prison must close and we all need to move on.

    Moreover, once Susanville is closed, there is much more to do. The California Rehabilitation Center — a dilapidated prison in Norco, Riverside County — would be a strong choice to close in tandem with CCC. The Newsom administration’s own nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office calculated that closing five adult prisons in California would save $1.5 billion per year by 2025.

    Coalitions like Californians United for a Responsible Budget and many others have called for reductions to the state’s $18.6 billion corrections budget and advocated for more spending to be directed toward services, infrastructure and good jobs. We are asking for more people in Susanville and across the state and country to join in solidarity with us in our search for justice. Swiftly closing CCC will bring us one step closer to a stronger, safer California.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Activists Have Gathered Enough Signatures to Put $18 Wage on California Ballot

    California voters will likely soon get a chance to vote on raising the state’s minimum wage to $18 an hour, as proponents of the proposal have gathered enough signatures for the measure to appear on the ballot this November.

    On Thursday, the Living Wage Act announced that the group has begun submitting the signatures it’s gathered in support of the initiative to the California Secretary of State. The initiative has gathered over 1 million signatures, far past the roughly 620,000 signatures needed to qualify to appear on the ballot. The group behind the Living Wage Act says that labor unions and advocates played a huge role in helping gather signatures for the initiative.

    Currently, the state minimum wage for employers with 26 employees or more is $15 an hour, and $14 an hour for employers with 25 employees or fewer. The state is set to raise the minimum wage for all employers to $15.50 in January of 2023.

    If approved by voters, the new ballot initiative would continue increasing the minimum wage incrementally from there, until it reaches $18 an hour statewide in 2026.

    California has one of the highest state minimum wages in the country, rivaled only by Massachusetts, Washington and Washington, D.C. However, advocates say that $15 an hour is not enough to live off of in the state.

    “California voters have been clear: people working full time should be able to afford life’s basic needs,” said Joe Sanberg, an investor and anti-poverty advocate who is sponsoring the initiative, in a statement. “Californians simply cannot afford to support a family on the current minimum wage — which amounts to just $31,200 a year for someone working full-time. Raising the minimum wage in the Golden State is a moral imperative.”

    When the initiative started in December, a living wage for a single adult with no children in California was $18.66 an hour. But now, with inflation skyrocketing, even $18 an hour may not be enough for workers in the state. According to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s living wage calculator, a living wage for an adult with no children in California is now estimated to be $21.82 an hour. That number skyrockets if the worker has children.

    An $18 minimum wage is still an ambitious goal. Legislators in Hawaii have passed a $18 minimum wage measure, but few other states have set their minimum wage above $15. Further, 15 states don’t even have a state minimum wage higher than $7.25 an hour, which has been the federal minimum wage since 2009.

    Polls show that the appetite in some states for a higher minimum wage is strong, however. According to polling from Tulchin Research, 76 percent of Californians likely to vote in November’s general election say that they support raising the minimum wage. Other recent polling by Data for Progress finds that a majority of likely New York voters support raising the minimum wage to at least $20 an hour, with a third of respondents saying that they think it should be at least $25.

    If the initiative in California passes, it could be a signal that voters are ready to change the goalposts on the initiative for a $15 federal minimum wage. Workers have been waging the Fight for $15 for a decade now; with inflation, what was $15 then would only be worth $11.94 now. Economists say that a $15 federal minimum wage would still be a huge boon to many hourly workers — but, if the minimum wage had risen with productivity, it would actually be $31.67 an hour today.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Starbucks Union Momentum Grows With Groundbreaking First Wins in California

    Employees at two Starbucks locations in Santa Cruz, California won union elections on Wednesday, scoring the rapidly spreading movement’s first victories in the nation’s most populous state even as management intensifies its efforts to stamp out worker organizing.

    The groundbreaking victories, like many of the Starbucks union’s wins thus far, were nearly unanimous. The Ocean and Water location in Santa Cruz voted 13-1 in favor of joining Workers United — the national union representing Starbucks workers — and the Mission and Dufour shop voted 15-2 in support of unionization.

    “Let the floodgates open in California,” Casey Moore, a spokesperson and organizer with Workers United, said during a news conference.

    Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) congratulated the Starbucks workers in a Twitter post, calling the union votes “a major victory.”

    “Unions are the counterweight to corporate power,” Khanna wrote. “It’s time for Starbucks to pay fair wages and treat every worker with dignity and respect.”

    The union wins in California signal that organizing momentum is still growing at a remarkable pace amid aggressive pushback from management: More than 60 Starbucks locations nationwide have voted to unionize since the first union wins in December, and hundreds more have filed representation petitions with the National Labor Relations Board.

    In an attempt to undercut the organizing wave, Starbucks in recent weeks has fired workers closely involved in unionization efforts, slashed hours at locations across the country, and threatened to deny new benefits and wage increases to employees who have voted or are in the process of voting to unionize.

    The company’s union-busting has drawn pushback from the NLRB. Last week, the labor board filed a massive complaint accusing Starbucks of unlawful intimidation and other offenses in Buffalo, New York.

    On Tuesday, the NLRB asked a federal court in Tennessee to order Starbucks to reinstate seven Memphis workers who were fired as they tried to unionize. The board also said the corporation must “cease its unlawful conduct immediately so that all Starbucks workers can fully and freely exercise their labor rights.”

    Starbucks is now facing more than 50 formal complaints from the NLRB.

    In an analysis of NLRB data, Matt Bruenig of the People’s Policy Project projected Wednesday that the Starbucks union is “likely to have 6,384 workers at 228 locations in the next few months” if the current rate of organizing victories continues.

    Bruenig noted that the union has won 90% of the elections at Starbucks locations thus far, consistently receiving 70-80% of the vote.

    “If these same numbers hold for the 193 open cases where an election has not yet been administered,” Bruenig wrote, “then the Starbucks union will soon win an additional 174 elections and thereby add an additional 4,870 workers to their rolls.”

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Texas Governor Intensifies Cruel Rampage Against Undocumented Immigrants

    Over the last few weeks, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has gone on a particularly cruel, opportunistic, rampage against undocumented immigrants.

    First, he ordered state troopers to inspect every commercial truck coming into Texas from Mexico, arguing that this was a vital part of his effort to stop the smuggling of undocumented immigrants into the state. Of course, the move, which was always more of a PR stunt than a genuine effort to rein in people-smuggling cartels, was telegraphed so far in advance that the smugglers went elsewhere.

    Governor Abbott’s troopers snarled traffic with their searches, leading Democratic gubernatorial challenger Beto O’Rourke to accuse the governor of worsening already tough supply chain conditions. Ultimately, over the eight days the order was in effect, state troopers didn’t find huge numbers of hidden, would-be immigrants, hardly a surprise given they had telegraphed the whole operation in advance.

    Then, in another PR stunt, the governor announced his officers would start rounding up undocumented immigrants caught along the border, and, on his order, would bus them off to Washington, D.C. This, too, backfired when many of the migrants began publicly thanking Abbott for the free ride to D.C.

    Now, as the Biden administration moves toward lifting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Title 42 restrictions on the southern border, Abbott has, according to media reports, begun studying the possibility of declaring the large numbers of undocumented people currently attempting to cross the border into the United States an “invasion.” This move would essentially allow the governor to use war powers to deputize state law enforcement officers to serve as immigration enforcement, and permit those officers to summarily deport migrants unlucky enough to fall into their clutches.

    It’s a grotesque policy proposal that gives more than a nod of homage to the unsavory role played by the Texas Rangers, a state agency that too often acted as a murderous vigilante group deployed to violently police the borderlands in decades and centuries past. Even though it would almost certainly trigger a huge legal battle, the governor clearly believes the optics are in his favor as immigration rises on the list of concerns that Americans talk about to pollsters.

    The Texas governor has been cheered on by members of Texas’s increasingly far right legislature, as well as by onetime members of former President Donald Trump’s administration — who have urged him to allow state troopers and National Guardsmen to send would-be migrants back across the border.

    The National Border Patrol Council (NBPC), the union that represents Border Patrol officers and staff, also supports Abbott’s proposal. Indeed, the NBPC’s president, Brandon Judd, recently told Fox News he believed President Joe Biden was pushing an open borders policy, and that he was doing so specifically to change the demographics of the U.S. electorate. In addition to these statements being a horrifying echo of white supremacist “Great Replacement” rhetoric, they ignore the fact that undocumented immigrants and legal residents are actually already denied the right to vote.

    Governor Abbott, coming off of Texas’s recent victories at the U.S. Supreme Court regarding its law allowing private citizens to sue abortion providers and others who assist people in getting abortions, has also now set his sights on another judicial precedent: He has proposed allowing local school districts to deny undocumented children access to public schools.

    As the governor knows too well, undocumented children’s right to access to public schools has long been settled case law. Texas tried this once before, in 1975, when it amended its education laws so as to deny local school districts funds for educating undocumented children. Six years later, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in Plyler v. Doe that this was unconstitutional.

    It was this ruling that kicked in more than a decade later, in 1994, when voters in California — at the time headed by Republican Gov. Pete Wilson, and with an electorate that had swung far to the right both on crime and on immigration — overwhelmingly passed Proposition 187, that barred undocumented kids from its public schools, and undocumented people of all ages from public health services and an array of other benefits.

    Even before Latinx activists began counter-organizing against the measure, and even before California’s increasingly diverse electorate started having second thoughts about its response to mass immigration, the courts got involved. Days after the election, a federal district court judge issued an injunction barring the proposition’s provisions from being implemented. Nearly five years later, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the measure was unconstitutional.

    Abbott and his Texas GOP cheerleaders would do well to pause a moment in their stampede toward xenophobia and ponder what happened to the California GOP in the years following Proposition 187.

    In 1994, when Governor Wilson whipped up voters’ fears of crime and immigration, the Republicans controlled the governorship. They had controlled it for all but eight years since 1967. For most of that time, one of California’s two U.S. senators had also been Republican. The state attorney general was Republican. The mayor of Los Angeles was a Republican, and many other top city officials around the state were members of the GOP as well. Although the legislature was controlled by the Democratic Party, the margins were small and the GOP remained influential.

    Proposition 187 marked a decisive turning point in California politics. In the decades following, the number of Latinos registered to vote in California increased roughly threefold. Young people also began voting in much higher numbers. Those new voters were key to driving xenophobic officials out of office in the Golden State and shifting its state and city politics leftward.

    Wilson would serve out his full term and leave office in January 1999. Since then, the only GOP governor has been Arnold Schwarzenegger, a moderate who, by modern GOP standards is what the Trumpites derogatively term a “Republican In Name Only,” or “RINO.” The state’s attorney general is a Democrat. Both legislative houses have Democratic supermajorities, and virtually every major city in the state, with the exception of Fresno, is run by Democratic mayors.

    Abbott is doing in 2022 what Governor Wilson did in California in 1994. He’s using undocumented immigration as a way to demagogue himself into reelection. It may well work in the short term. In the long run, however, Abbott’s shameless political stunts, if they enrage enough people in his state that new political coalitions start to emerge to counter them, could end up costing his state party dearly.

    Yet, regardless of the possible consequences for the GOP down the line, we must remember the concrete consequences for migrants in the here and now. Abbott is treating human beings as political pawns, and he’s showing no signs of easing off on his demagogic campaign.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • United States: Black women face double blow if ‘Roe vs Wade’ overturned

    The stake for Black women and the working class in the fight for abortion rights and to become equal and full citizens is existential, writes Malik Miah.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Stop Using Cash Bail To Separate Mothers From Their Children

    Roughly 4,300 women across California will spend this Mother’s Day in pretrial custody. An estimated 80% are mothers, and most are their children’s primary caretakers. Pretrial incarceration — leading to coerced guilty pleas, unemployment and housing loss — devastates these women and their children, who are left behind.

    This mass family-separation is the work of judges who break the law and elected bodies that fund incarceration over community-centered care. Last year, the California Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional to jail presumptively innocent people solely because they cannot afford to pay cash bail. In January, the California Legislature extended the same protections to people accused of violating their probation. Yet, a recent report from Silicon Valley De-Bug, a community advocacy organization, found that judges continue to set unaffordable cash bail in most cases.

    The post Stop Using Cash Bail To Separate Mothers From Their Children appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • California May Soon Face Surge of Out-of-State Abortion Patients

    People travel to California for lots of reasons: to visit Hollywood and Fisherman’s Wharf, to hike Yosemite and Muir Woods. In the event Roe v. Wade is overturned, it is likely to become a top destination for abortions, too.

    Indeed, if Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked majority opinion becomes the final say of the Court as expected, once-guaranteed abortion rights codified by the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 will cease to exist. It will be up to each individual state to decide whether to ban or allow abortions, and experts forecast about half of U.S. states would implement bans. This means abortion clinics for an estimated 41 percent of women of reproductive age would close, forcing women who have the resources to travel elsewhere.

    Just as many states are doubling-down on efforts to secure bans and then some in the event Roe v. Wade is overturned, many states — like California — are taking action to ensure anyone can access abortion in the state, and secure abortion rights. The Golden State’s governor Gavin Newsom has long pledged that the state would become a “sanctuary” for people seeking abortion care. But news of the leaked opinion has resurfaced efforts and pledges to do so. For example, Newsom recently proposed an amendment that would “enshrine the right to choose” in California’s constitution.

    “We know we can’t trust the Supreme Court to protect reproductive rights, so California will build a firewall around this right in our state constitution,” Newsom said in a statement. “Women will remain protected here.”

    Come November, California voters will be asked if they support a constitutional amendment to ensure permanent abortion access in the state. But that’s not all California legislators are doing to widen abortion care for all. In March, Newsom signed a law to make abortions less expensive for people on private insurance plans. California state Sen. Tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) introduced a bill this year that would allow nurse practitioners to perform abortions without the oversight of a doctor. These collective efforts are taking place to support an anticipated surge in out-of-state patients seeking abortion care.

    Lisa Matsubara, Vice President of Policy and General Counsel of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, told Salon that California has been in the process of preparing for Roe v. Wade to be overturned for quite some time, since the passage of a draconian anti-abortion law in Texas in 2021. Matsubara agreed it is a little difficult to know what the impact on California would be depending on what the final Supreme Court opinion is regarding the constitutionality of a Mississippi state law that prohibits abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

    “It could mean that overnight, we’re going to see 26 states pretty much go dark,” Matsubara said, “or it could potentially mean if the Supreme Court ends up not completely overturning Roe, which might be more of a piecemeal approach over the course of several months.”

    Matsubara was circumspect about making any predictions, but said the state would be ready for an influx. “I think it’s a little bit hard to tell what exactly the the number of folks that might be traveling to California or really any of the states where abortion will remain legal will look like, but a lot of the efforts that we’re currently doing right now is to make sure that we can build capacity and that also have the ability to increase capacity as needed,” she said.

    According to a Guttmacher Institute report, California could see a 2,923% increase in number of women whose nearest abortion provider would be in California. Many who would come from Arizona, which is almost certain to ban abortion outright. While this would certainly put pressure on California’s abortion-care providers — as more than 40 percent of California counties do not have clinics that provide abortions — it would be a welcome trend.

    But can California clinics and providers handle it?

    “I think that’s the question of the hour,” Flor Hunt, the executive director of Training in Early Abortion for Comprehensive Healthcare (TEACH), which provides training inn reproductive healthcare and networking for a number of Northern California Family Medicine residencies, told Salon. “I think everybody in California is trying to prepare, and there’s certainly a lot that we’re doing to try to increase capacity to be able to mobilize capacity in the event that Roe is overturned, but I don’t think anybody really knows what that is going to mean, and how many patients we’re going to be seeing.”

    As reported by CBS News, Southern California Planned Parenthood clinics reported that they saw an increase in patients after the Texas post-six-week abortion ban. Many advocates say that was a preview of what’s to come.

    “SB 8 of Texas gave us a sense of what the impact was on neighboring states,” Hunt said. “There’s a statistic around wait times increasing 25-fold in the neighboring states, but I think that as California is trying to mobilize and prepare, we’re all a little bit in the dark about the degree to which we need to increase capacity and what that’s really going to look like.”

    Hunt added that medication abortions and telehealth appointments have made in-person procedures a little less necessary. As part of the recommendations from the California Future of Abortion Council, which includes a list of possible legislation the state should adopt in order to prepare, one recommendation is to offer medication abortions in other states via telehealth.

    Hunt said TEACH is working closely with their clinical partners to staff clinics in the event that a large increase in patients occurs.

    “So we’ve been having conversations with the training partners that we work with about their staffing needs, and talking about how we can increase capacity, staffing their clinics with our preceptors,” Hunt said. “Also that provides more training opportunities, which means that more residents are getting trained in abortion and then will be ready to graduate with the ability to provide care once they’re done with residency as well.”

    Hunt added that they also have a training program for teaching how to prescribe medication abortions open to all clinicians, such as family practitioners, who may not be trained. Indeed, if abortion clinics like Planned Parenthood see an increase in out-of-town patients, it would be best to deal with the increase in number abortions by enabling other types of clinicians to treat such patients.

    “Family planning clinics play a hugely important role in providing access to abortion care, but Californians should also be able to find access to abortion care when they go to their primary care provider,” Hunt said. “We believe really strongly that abortion is essential healthcare, it should be included in primary care and we want to help clinicians who want to be able to provide that care to do so.”

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Oakland Teachers And Dockworkers Fight For Their Community

    On April 29, thousands of teachers, students and parents from Schools and Labor Against Privatization (SLAP) rallied at Oscar Grant Plaza next to City Hall in Oakland, California, then marched to the Port of Oakland where they held a picket line that shut the port down.

    The innovative joint labor action was an historic day in the campaign led by SLAP, union teachers of the Oakland Education Association (OEA) and International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) Local 10, against racist gentrification in Oakland.

    The post Oakland Teachers And Dockworkers Fight For Their Community appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • L.A. County Seeks Bids To Bring High-Speed Internet To Poor Black, Latino Areas

    Post-pandemic, there is near universal agreement that fast reliable internet is as essential as electricity or water, but the debate over who should provide it and how is still heated.

    Big telecom companies have long fought to keep government out of their business: Barriers to municipal broadband are in place in 18 states, making it hard for localities to establish their own networks, thanks to industry lobbying. Even in California — where legislators lifted a restriction on public broadband in rural areas in 2018 — publicly owned networks are still rare.

    Now, however, $65 billion in broadband funding included in last year’s federal infrastructure bill has changed the dynamic, fueling a nationwide rush by state and local governments to connect residents to the internet. Los Angeles County is at the forefront among municipalities with a public-private partnership to offer free broadband internet to its poorest residents in Watts, Boyle Heights, Sun Valley and four other communities as soon as year’s end. These are neighborhoods that are heavily Latino and Black.

    The post L.A. County Seeks Bids To Bring High-Speed Internet To Poor Black, Latino Areas appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Adapting to Drought

    America’s western metropolises are thriving in the midst of the fiercest drought in over 1,000 years.

    Not all climate change/global warming news is negative. Positive pushback to global warming is real and happening right under our collective noses.

    Still, climate scientists wring their hands in despair over the failure of the corporate-controlled world to come to grips with climate change’s biggest bugaboo, which is too much fossil fuel emitting too much CO2 creating too much warmth that eventually brings on excessive heat. Ergo! Ecosystems fail! Droughts accelerate!

    For decades now, scientists have been warning about the danger of too much fossil fuel causing climate system failure, like wet-bulb temperature-related deaths within 6 hrs. @ 95°F/90%H (India?), crop failures, rising sea levels, and scorching droughts. The broken promises of nation/states to “fix it” almost always turn to dust or result in too little, too late.

    Yet, Hooray! Human ingenuity is alive and well. Adapting to record-setting drought in the United States is happening, especially in desert cities in America’s arid West, living proof that adaptation to a broken climate system is possible and likely for decades to come. The level of success is reason enough for some amount of cheer and good feelings. America’s western cities are taking on the worst drought in centuries and winning!

    But, before looking behind the scenes of heroic efforts by some of America’s biggest cities, it is crucial to look at an all-points bulletin issued by the Bureau of Reclamation about critically low water levels at Lake Powell and at Lake Mead, which are responsible for hydroelectric power for millions and drinking water for 40M people in the West. Water levels at these two crucial reservoirs are dangerously low, calling for extreme measures years earlier than planned.

    The Bureau had to pull off some gimmickry (hydrological accounting) for Lake Powell to continue providing hydroelectric power to millions of homes. Otherwise, the power was destined to end as water levels fall below intakes. Water levels at Lake Powell are at all-time lows. The Bureau of Reclamation, in order to keep both hydropower and drinking water for millions, had to employ gimmickry whilst “holding the hands” of seven (7) states that receive their water downstream from the Colorado River to Lake Powell and onto Lake Mead, which is also at all-time record lows going back to 1937 when Lake Mead first started filling up. This is heartbreaking evidence of the devastating drought throughout the West, which refuses to let up.

    The Bureau’s gimmickry includes plans for Lake Mead to give up some water intake from Lake Powell to keep the hydropower on for millions of homes. The Bureau, in turn, is robbing water (162B gallons) from a recreational reservoir, Flaming Gorge Reservoir (Wyoming and Utah), to be sent to Lake Powell. This somewhat complicated transaction keeps the lights on for millions, although, Lake Mead loses 480,000 acre-feet of water that Lake Powell normally sends its way. In the end, it’s hoped that spring snow runoff will compensate for the loss to Lake Mead.

    The maneuvers by the Bureau include contingency plans that trigger mandatory water reductions for western states such as Arizona (-30%). As a result, farmers in the Phoenix area will have to fallow cotton and alfalfa fields. Most importantly, the accounting gimmick will allow the Bureau to avoid declaring a Tier 2b shortage as it artificially assumes (cooking the books) that Lake Mead did receive water from Lake Powell that it did not receive. As it happens, the Western states are already at Tier 1 shortages whereas a Tier 2b shortage would involve draconian cuts.

    The short take on this convoluted affair is that America’s West is running out of adequate water supply in large measure because of an unrelenting drought that has all of the characteristics of a mega-drought. A megadrought is defined as a period of extreme dryness that lasts for decades. During a megadrought wet years do appear but quickly return to severe dryness. The current drought in America’s West has lasted for 20 years.

    Along the way the big metropolitan regions have learned how to capitalize on those intermittent wet years in addition to smart measures to conserve and create more potable water. In remarkable fashion, they have learned to cope and are fighting back against the worst drought in recorded history, building adequate supplies of water, and in some cases, more than enough water, as the world surrounding these megalopolises containing millions of people turns brutally dangerously hot and dry. This exemplifies human initiative and ingenuity at work, and it promises to extend quality life in the desert West beyond the challenges of the worst drought in 1,200 years. It is something to behold.

    San Diego, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, and Albuquerque in the face of the worst drought since William the Conquer (1028-1087) hit the shores of England are already working around the issue of federal cuts in Colorado River water, the first cuts in history.

    The San Diego Water Authority recently did a water supply stress test that showed it is “water good” until 2045, and probably beyond. Similar results are happening in Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Albuquerque, all nestled within a drought apocalypse, but managing to create adequate supply of water to continue growing into the surrounding desert countryside. It’s a miracle of ingenuity, foresight, and dedication. It’s all about sourcing and conserving water.

    YaleEnvironment360, an indispensible source for best coverage of the environment, recently published an article by Jim Robbins: “A Quiet Revolution: Southwest Cities Learn to Thrive Amid Drought”, YaleEnvironment360, April 24, 2022, stating:  “From replacing water-guzzling lawns with native vegetation, to low-flow plumbing fixtures, to water recycling and desalination, to the shift of agricultural water to cities, governments in arid western regions are pursuing an all-of-the-above strategy.”

    The upshot is that water conservation is one of the keys to successfully encountering droughts. For example, San Diego water usage dropped from 81.5 billion gallons in 2007 to 57 billion gallons in 2020 because of conservation measures.

    Moreover, nine (9) desert cities in the Colorado River Basin complex lowered water demand by 19% to 48% from years 2000 to 2015. These are testimonials to the value of conservation measures.

    According to YaleEnvironment360:

    San Diego has pursued a multi-pronged approach. The city now requires an array of water-saving technology in new homes, such as low-flow toilets and showerheads. Perhaps the single biggest piece of the conservation solution is paying homeowners to tear out yards full of Kentucky bluegrass and replace them with far more water-efficient landscaping. The city-run program pays up to $4 a square foot for as much as 5,000 square feet, and so far has replaced 42 million square feet of water-thirsty lawns.

    Per capital water usage for the San Diego County Water Authority has dropped from 235 gallons per day per capita in 1990 to 135 gallons per day now. That is an impressive change. Furthermore, the city captures 90% of rainwater runoff for additional supply to 24 reservoirs where it is treated to drinking water standards.

    Oceanside, California, near San Diego, just opened a “toilet to tap” recycling facility that creates 3 million gallons per day or 20% of the city needs. Similarly, San Diego is working on a project for 40% of city water needs by recycling “toilet to tap.” San Diego is also home to North America’s largest desalination plant.

    The metropolis of Phoenix took the number of single-family homes with lush landscaping from 80% in the 1970s down to 10% in 2022 as desert heat-tolerant plants replaced water-guzzling grass.

    Los Angeles is beating the drought challenge with heavy investments in water storage, rainwater capture and reclamation with a goal of self-sufficiency of 70% of city water needs from local sources by 2035. LA mayor Eric Garcetti claims: “We’re going to have plenty of water.” 1  According to Felicia Marcus, former chair of the California State Water Resources Control Board, who is now a visiting fellow at Stanford University: “The LA area is going to be the epicenter of climate adaptation in urban water in the world. ”2

    Work is already underway in LA with massive upgrades to wastewater treatment plants for potable water, spending $4.3B for the city’s Hyperion Water Reclamation Plant. LA will source 35% of the city’s water from recycling versus 2% today. Additionally, some of the world’s largest groundwater treatment facilities are under construction in the San Fernando Valley.

    LA is currently expanding catch basins and inlets that recharge aquifers, and it is planning to double rainwater capture capacity over the next 15 years. That’s water that previously flowed directly into the ocean.

    Conservation measures for LA started in the 1970s. Today, LA uses less water per capita than it did 50 years ago despite a population increase of one million. Water usage per capita has declined by more than 40%.

    The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California has a record 3.2 million acre feet of water in reservoirs, thanks to the foresight to overbuild storage reservoirs combined with conservation measures, all the while working against the impact of the worst drought in over 1,000 years.

    The state of California is moving to small-scale recycling. For example, in San Francisco, every commercial building over 100,000 sq. ft. has to use on-site recycling systems.  Additionally, home water recycling units are coming soon, prompting some water aficionados to speculate that water utilities could end up with stranded assets or extra capacity.

    Optimism about future stable growth in America’s West is directly tied to adapting to the rigors of a megadrought: “We know it’s a desert and we plan accordingly,’ said Arizona’s Kathryn Sorenson (Kyl Center for Water Policy). ‘Phoenix can survive dead pool’ — the term for a nearly empty Lake Mead — for generations. We have groundwater; we have done a good job of conservation and diversifying our portfolios. Desert cities are the oldest cities, and we will withstand the test of time.” 3

    1. Eckhouse and Bliss, “Los Angeles Is Building a Future Where Water Won’t Run Out”, Bloomberg, January 31, 2022.
    2. Ibid.
    3. YaleEnvironment360.
    The post Adapting to Drought first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Newsom Pledges to Amend California’s Constitution to Enshrine Abortion Rights

    In the wake of new revelations detailing how the United States Supreme Court’s conservative bloc majority intends to undo abortion protections recognized in the landmark 1973 ruling Roe v. Wade, Democratic lawmakers in California have announced that they intend to not only strengthen abortion rights in state statutes but to also enumerate them within the state constitution.

    In a joint statement released after a leaked draft document authored by Justice Samuel Alito was made public Monday night, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), state Senate President pro Tempore Toni G. Atkins (D-San Diego) and state Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) said that “California will not stand idly by as women across America are stripped of their rights and the progress so many have fought for gets erased.”

    “California is proposing an amendment to enshrine the right to choose in our state constitution so that there is no doubt as to the right to abortion in this state,” the trio added in their statement.

    Saying that they couldn’t “trust the Supreme Court to protect reproductive rights,” the statement from the three lawmakers also promised to “build a firewall around this right” for residents in the state.

    In a separate statement he made on his own, Newsom called the draft document from Alito an “appalling attack” on abortion rights. He also warned that the attacks on personal freedoms wouldn’t stop with abortion.

    Conservatives on the Supreme Court “are undermining progress, and erasing the civil protections and rights so many have fought for over the last half century,” Newsom said, adding:

    I’m furious that my own daughters and sons could grow up in an America that is less free than the one they were born into.

    California lawmakers, including Newsom, have promised to step up efforts to make abortion accessible not just for residents of the state but for anyone in the U.S. seeking to have an abortion, should Roe be overturned by the nation’s highest court. Those assurances were made back in December after the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’’’s Health, the case that threatens to upend Roe.

    Democrats in California are seeking to make the state a “sanctuary” for abortion, and have even proposed covering traveling and lodging costs for individuals who come from out of state for abortion services, if Roe is overturned.

    By enumerating the right to an abortion in the state constitution California hopes to make ending or curtailing the human right much more difficult.

    California’s constitution can be amended in a number of ways. First, the state legislature itself can propose an amendment, after which it must be approved by a two-thirds majority in both houses. Subsequently, a majority of the state’s voters must also vote in favor of the amendment to the State Constitution in an election.

    Another approach would be for California residents to propose constitutional amendments to be voted on through a ballot initiative. If petitioners gather enough signatures – equaling 8 percent or more of the total number of votes cast in the previous gubernatorial election – the measure gets on the ballot for voters to decide on in the next election.

    Recent polling suggests that California voters would be open to both amending the constitution to make abortion a permanently recognized right in the state, as well as making California a sanctuary state for abortion services. A Public Policy Institute of California poll from October, for example, found that 79 percent of likely voters in the Golden State did not want to see Roe overturned, while only 20 percent said they did. Moreover, 68 percent of likely voters in California also said they were concerned about other states making it more difficult to obtain an abortion, while only 30 percent of voters said they were worried states were making it too easy to have an abortion.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Public Universities Need More Democracy, Not More Administrators

    The current crisis in higher education leadership is on full display at California State University (CSU) — the nation’s largest four-year public university system. Take the case of former CSU Chancellor Joseph Castro.

    Castro’s problems began with an underling — Fresno State’s Vice President of Student Affairs Frank Lamas — who was the subject of ongoing sexual harassment complaints and investigations. In 2018, Castro “enthusiastically” nominated his colleague to become the next president of CSU San Marcos. But later, as complaints about his VP’s behavior avalanched, Castro authorized a $260,000 payout and retirement package for the troubled subordinate. The sweetheart deal included a glowing recommendation letter. That’s golden parachute number one.

    When these actions came to light last winter, Castro was forced to end his brief reign as chief administrative officer at CSU. Despite a rather ignominious departure, Castro received more than $400,000 “to advise” the CSU board of trustees for a year and, even without a glowing letter of recommendation, he retains the right to a high-salaried, tenured faculty position at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. Say “hello” to golden parachute number two.

    In what sounds like an episode of “The Real Presidents of Cal State” or a “Game of Thrones” spinoff, within the past month, CSU signed a check for $600,000 to a former provost to quietly settle retaliation and sexual harassment allegations made against the husband of Sonoma State’s president, Judy Sakaki. The claim was settled just weeks before Sakaki and other CSU presidents met with a key state legislator to express their qualms over Castro’s leadership of the system.

    These cases are not exceptions. For top CSU administrators, golden parachutes and insider dealing are the rule. As the Los Angeles Times recently reported, more than $4 million in salary and benefits has been paid out in recent years to former high-level administrators. CSU started its “executive transition” program in 1981; it has since been expanded three times. Castro’s predecessor as CSU chancellor, Tim White, receives $327,000 a year for two years plus a $24,000 car allowance. Executives in the program are typically “transitioned” into well-paying tenure-track faculty jobs. California’s state auditor has noted that these arrangements lack transparency and recommended that CSU do a better job of oversight. One beneficiary of the program recently informed a Los Angeles Times reporter that “she was not required to document her work performed under the program.” As students and faculty at the nation’s largest public university system struggle with a pandemic, skyrocketing costs of living, and major disruptions to teaching and learning, CSU continues to subsidize no-show jobs and secret deals for its managerial elite.

    In its first public meeting since the revelations about the ex-chancellor, the Board of Trustees faced vocal criticism from CSU students, faculty and staff. Proclaiming that they “were kept in the dark” about Castro’s problems, the board announced that the executive transition program will be put on hold until an internal task force reviews the program and issues its recommendations.

    We wish this scandal was just about some bad actors. Instead, it’s time to recognize that the whole mess — self-dealing, secrecy, mismanagement — reflects a systemic failure in higher education.

    For over three decades, the academic job market has boomed only for those at the very top of the pay scale — university and college administrators. In 1993, the CSU system employed a little over 2,000 administrators; by 2018, that number had grown to 4,281. In the short span between 2007 and 2015, the numbers of CSU managers grew by 15 percent while the number of faculty grew by 7 percent. Over a five-year period (2011-2016), the budget for the CSU Chancellor’s Office rose by $10 million. From 2005 to 2018, the average CSU president’s salary — exclusive of housing and car allowances — rose by 38 percent. Meanwhile, the number of tenure and tenure-track faculty has stagnated at around 10,500 professors. The number of underpaid, temporary faculty has exploded to almost 17,000, just about two-thirds of CSU faculty.

    This lopsided growth reflects a tectonic shift in California (and the U.S. more generally) — the ongoing privatization of public higher education as the cost of a bachelor’s degree is shifted from the state to students. In California, the story begins with Ronald Reagan, who spent most of his two terms (1967 to 1975) as governor trying to punish student and faculty activists by imposing tuition at California’s largely free public colleges and universities. By the late ‘70s, these efforts had borne fruit. In 1980, the State of California spent about $11,240 per CSU student; by 2013, that number had dropped to $6,147. (Over just five years — 2007 and 2012 — CSU and University of California lost a combined $2 billion in state aid.) To make ends meet, CSU’s largely working-class students picked up the tab. CSU annual tuition and fees skyrocketed from about $500 in 1979 to $7,300 in 2022. Over just two decades, 1994 to 2014, in-state tuition at CSU tripled even though institutional expenditures barely grew. By one estimate, students paid 1,360 percent more in inflation-adjusted dollars to attend CSU in 2022 than they did in 1972. Today’s student debt crisis is a direct consequence of this history.

    Banks and other lenders reaped the profits from this shift, while public college and university administration responded by mimicking the private sector. Presidents added “CEO” to their titles, while provosts became “chief operating officers” and budget offices were headed by CFOs. More importantly, administrators began to take control of public higher education from faculty and students. Student enrollment in U.S. higher education grew by 78 percent from 1976 to 2018 and full-time faculty kept pace by growing 92 percent, but the number of administrators and executives grew by 164 percent over the same period. Within the CSU system, the number of full-time faculty grew by a measly 3 percent from 1975 to 2008; over the same period, the number of administrators grew by a whopping 221 percent. Over a critical 10-year period (2004-2014) that witnessed catastrophic state budget cuts, California offloaded the costs of higher education onto students and faculty salaries trailed behind inflation, even as management salaries rose 24 percent and CSU president salaries swelled by 36 percent (excluding perks like housing and car allowances). The moral of the story echoes one of neoliberalism’s basic principles: austerity for most, prosperity for a few.

    While some describe this management boom as “administrative bloat,” we believe it points to a more profound problem: the creation and growth of an administrative class within higher education, a special interest group that is profoundly disconnected from the vital heart of the university — teaching and learning, faculty and students. Members of this administrative class move from one position and one campus to another — often quite frequently. Many have brief or limited experience of the classroom. They usually have exclusive control of an institution’s purse strings. They also typically view the university in terms of organizational charts and “chains of command.” And, because they are only accountable to each other, they survive and prosper through patronage and clientelism.

    When a subordinate reported being bullied and harassed by Fresno State’s vice president of student affairs, ex-Chancellor Castro reportedly responded: “Well, I’m in a really tough spot because Frank [the vice president] is babysitting my son this weekend.” It’s difficult to find a statement that better or more richly sums up the dynamics and dysfunction of the administrative class.

    Like any large organization, universities require administration. That’s not the same as saying that universities need an administrative class. To avoid crony managerialism and create more effective administration, universities should instead practice a more democratic and participatory model of leadership. British, German, Japanese, and many other university systems offer one alternative. In these systems, students and faculty (and sometimes staff) play a more central role in decision-making because they elect academic officers — including chancellors, presidents and deans. The university rector is not a professional administrator but instead a member of the faculty who knows the institution well through their career as a teacher and scholar. In many of these systems, the rector enjoys a specific term of office before they return to the faculty. While rectors may appoint managers, their decisions are ultimately subject to the academic community they represent — not to a coterie of like-minded bureaucrats.

    As recent events at CSU demonstrate, higher education leadership is in crisis. The current system — with its sweetheart deals and cronyism — benefits a few at the expense of the many, including students, faculty and the public. Hiring consultants and assembling task forces won’t resolve this crisis. More democracy is the only path to more accountability at California’s public universities and colleges.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • New York And California Experiment With Giving Workers A Say In Industry Standards

    California, a state with more than a half million fast food employees (the most in the country), is considering a bill to address that structural exploitation. The Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act (AB 257), presently in the state senate after passing the state assembly, would make corporate franchisers liable for the labor violations of their franchisees, as well as protect workers who speak up. In New York, the Nail Salon Minimum Standards Act, introduced in January, would create a worker council with business owners, government delegates and workers in 15 voting seats. It has the power to recommend a statewide pricing model, addressing the race to the bottom that’s pushing salon owners to cut corners and wages.

    The post New York And California Experiment With Giving Workers A Say In Industry Standards appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • 55,000 SEIU Members May Strike In Los Angeles. This Is Why I Am Voting Yes.

    “I am a worker at the Department of Mental Health in Los Angeles County, and I’m a member of SEIU Local 721. The Los Angeles Department of Mental Health is the largest mental health service in the U.S. Its annual budget is $3 billion. As one of the workers deployed by the county during the pandemic to work with people with severe disabilities at pop-up shelters in recreation centers, I am voting to strike, and it’s important for all other members of my union local to do the same.”

    The post 55,000 SEIU Members May Strike In Los Angeles. This Is Why I Am Voting Yes. appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Thousands Of Bay Area Nurses Go On Strike Over Pay, Bonuses And Mental Health Services

    More than 4,000 nurses from Stanford health care are on strike in Palo Alto on Monday.

    Nurses from Stanford Hospital went on strike at 6:45 a.m. and nurses from Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital in Palo Alto went to the picket line at 7 a.m.

    The nurses say they are serious and united as they negotiate with Stanford Hospital and Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital for better pay, better staffing and more mental health support.

    The post Thousands Of Bay Area Nurses Go On Strike Over Pay, Bonuses And Mental Health Services appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • The World’s First Ohlone Restaurant Is Opening Soon At UC Berkeley. Can It Overcome The Location’s Painful History?

    Dolores Lameira Galvan, 91, remembers hearing from her mother, aunts and uncles about their time working as housekeepers and laborers at Phoebe Apperson Hearst’s opulent mansion in what is now Pleasanton.

    She still prefers not to speak of the time her Ohlone family spent as servants on what had been the Indigenous people’s own land, says her nephew, Vincent Medina. For the Ohlone, it represents just one painful chapter in hundreds of years’ worth of trauma and loss in the East Bay and beyond.

    But decades later, Medina is working to reclaim his tribe’s history by opening the world’s first Ohlone restaurant in a space that carries the Hearst name. Cafe Ohlone, which he started as a pop-up with partner Louis Trevino in 2018, will debut in June at the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology at UC Berkeley. Members of the public will see the in-progress cafe for the first time Saturday during a preview event.

    The post The World’s First Ohlone Restaurant Is Opening Soon At UC Berkeley. Can It Overcome The Location’s Painful History? appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Climate Activists Occupy Wells Fargo Global Headquarters

    San Francisco — On the eve of Wells Fargo Bank’s annual shareholders’ meeting, 19 climate activists were arrested inside the bank’s headquarters demanding that it stop lending billions annually to the oil and gas industry, whose products are propelling the planet towards disaster.

    Wells is the world’s second largest fossil fuel banker—second only to JPMorgan Chase—financing $46 billion last year out of a total $742 billion in financing made to the energy sector. The bank far outstripped its rivals by raising its industry financing total by $20 billion from 2020 levels, according to new research by a consortium of organizations including Rainforest Action Network.

    “Wells Fargo is the poster child of climate profiteering,” says Alison Kirsch, policy and research manager of RAN’s climate and energy program.

    The post Climate Activists Occupy Wells Fargo Global Headquarters appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • A New Effort In San Francisco Aims To Debate Rent At The Bargaining Table

    On April 11, tenant representatives from the Veritas Tenants Association gathered at the mailbox at 150 Larkin St. across the lawn from San Francisco City Hall. They dropped 15 letters to their landlord, Veritas Investments, the largest landlord in San Francisco and the subject of lawsuits alleging tenant harassment, into the mailbox.

    “We will show what it means to unionize the biggest private landlord in S.F.,” tenant Madelyn McMillian said. “We will be bargaining on a full range of issues affecting our lives.”

    The post A New Effort In San Francisco Aims To Debate Rent At The Bargaining Table appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • United States: First Black woman confirmed to the Supreme Court

    Ketanji Brown Jackson was confirmed as the 116th justice of the Supreme Court on April 7, reports Malik Miah. While a victory, racism remains central to politics in the US.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Advocacy Groups Work To End Sexual Abuse At Women’s Prison

    Sexual abuse of prisoners by guards happens daily in the U.S. – in jails, prisons and detention centers – but is rarely reported to the public. The Associated Press recently blew the whistle on a pattern of sexual abuse and harassment at the Federal Correctional Institution in Dublin, California, one of the few federal women’s prisons in the U.S. (AP, Feb. 6)

    FCI Dublin is known by guards and prisoners as “the rape club,” and prisoners have suffered “rampant” sexual abuse at the hands of prison guards. Prison employees who questioned the abuse have been routinely threatened or disciplined.

    The post Advocacy Groups Work To End Sexual Abuse At Women’s Prison appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • California Schemin’: Will COVID censorship of healthcare professionals become law?

    California Assembly Bill #2098 was introduced on February 14, 2022. If passed, the bill would “designate the dissemination or promotion of misinformation or disinformation related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, or ‘COVID-19,’ as unprofessional conduct.”

    Translation: It’s corporate-sponsored censorship aimed at taking away power from health professionals who see through the COVID bullshit.

    Section 1 of the bill declares the following:

    (a) The global spread of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, or COVID-19, has claimed the lives of over 5,000,000 people worldwide, including nearly 75,000 Californians.

    (b) Data from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows that unvaccinated individuals are at a risk of dying from COVID-19 that is 11 times greater than those who are fully vaccinated.

    (c) The safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines have been confirmed through evaluation by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the vaccines continue to undergo intensive safety monitoring by the CDC.

    (d) The spread of misinformation and disinformation about COVID-19 vaccines has weakened public confidence and placed lives at serious risk.

    (e) Major news outlets have reported that some of the most dangerous propagators of inaccurate information regarding the COVID-19 vaccines are licensed health care professionals.

    FYI: Every entry above is patently and demonstrably false.

    Since the bill does not even define what “misinformation or disinformation” is, it’s obviously designed solely to squash debate and dissent. Of course, such authoritarianism is first being floated in a #woke state like California. But do not imagine — for one minute — that this is not coming to a State House near you.

    If you allow yourselves to be distracted by war propaganda or celebrity gossip, you’re making it so, so easy for the powers-that-shouldn’t-be to implement their nefarious plans. Even if you won’t fight back for yourself, how about standing up for future generations who may never know what freedom and autonomy mean?

    Three suggestions for starters:

    • Take the real time needed to educate yourself
    • Relentlessly share what you learn
    • Never comply with tyranny
    The post California Schemin’: Will COVID censorship of healthcare professionals become law? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • A Former Sundown Town Passed Reparations And Rent Control. Now It’s Fighting To Keep Them.

    “There’s the California that people imagine, a place I would love to visit and maybe buy a house on one salary,” Mayor Daniel Lee, now running for Congress, says with a smile. “Then, there’s the actual California.” Back in 2018, when Lee was elected as Culver City’s first Black councilmember, he didn’t know about the city’s history as a “sundown town,” a reference to all-white areas that enforce segregation through local laws, intimidation and violence. It was only at the Annual Legislative Conference hosted by the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation that other Black elected officials told him their stories of taking roundabout drives in their youth to avoid the notoriously racist Culver City Police Department.

    The post A Former Sundown Town Passed Reparations And Rent Control. Now It’s Fighting To Keep Them. appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • United States: No charge for cop who killed Amir Locke

    The cop who fatally shot Amir Locke during a predawn, “no-knock” raid in February, will not face charges, reports Malik Miah.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Black workers sue Tesla over systemic racism

    Tesla is being sued in a class action in the United States over a shocking racist culture and practice, reports Malik Miah.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Parents And Students Organize Sit-In In Solidarity With Striking Sacramento Teachers

    In an incredible show of solidarity, Sacramento parents and students have organized a sit-in to support striking teachers and support staff. Parents have been camping out at district headquarters in the Serna Center, calling for the school board to meet with teachers and reach an agreement. They are watching movies and playing board games, and have vowed to continue the sit-in until the district takes action. These community-led tactics demonstrate the interconnectedness between teachers and their communities.

    Since March 23, 4,000 educators in Sacramento have been on strike demanding higher pay in pace with inflation, increased staffing in their schools, no cuts to health benefits, and improved support for students. These educators and staff have gone without pay since the strike began and many of the lowest-paid staff members are struggling to make ends meet. Yet these workers are holding out and keeping up the fight, keenly aware that their fight is not only their own, but also that of their students and community.

    The post Parents And Students Organize Sit-In In Solidarity With Striking Sacramento Teachers appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.