Part of the Bay Area News Group

Minutemen win lawsuit against county Republicans, thank media

By Matt Artz
Wednesday, November 26th, 2008 at 8:10 pm in Uncategorized.

For a quick refresher, a group of minutemen and Ron Paul supporters banded together this year to win seats and take control of the Alameda County Republican Central Committee. The didn’t get a majority, they got pretty close, and won a majority of seats in the Fremont area.

The more moderate chairman of the committee later filed suit charging that many of the candidates hadn’t been registered as Republicans long enough to qualify.

The Minutemen released a statement today that a superior court judge has sided with them. They thanked a long list of people and organizations, but number one was the Bay Area News Group, The Argus’ parent company. If I were them I would have put my lawyer first, but, hey, thanks for the plug.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • http://www.constitutionalrepublicans.org Walter GOP Livermore City-Chair

    You can view our official Press Release here…
    http://www.constitutionalrepublicans.org/documents/CR%20Press%20Release%202008-11-26.pdf

    *We could spend all day thanking everyone who was helpful and supportive to our cause during this lawsuit.

    Matt Artz and Lisa V. were open to the complex details of our case, and were honest and factual in their reporting regarding the subject. The Alameda County Constitutional Republicans can all respect that, and thought it would be fitting to give a public “thank-you” for all their effort in bringing the facts to the people.

    Most of all, we would like to thank our supporters on the local grass-roots level for remaining committed to our mission and never giving in. Because of their support and aid, we were able to achieve victory against the Chairman and the Republican Party, who without a doubt, had all the resources at their disposal. Maybe next time, they’ll spend Party resources on winning elections and beating the Democrats instead of suing Republican volunteers because of who they supported in the Presidential Primary Election.

    Now, it’s time to get the GOP back on track by promoting the Party’s traditional limited government principals and platform.

    ~ RESTORE THE REPUBLIC ~ DON’T TREAD ON ME CHAIRMAN PAUL CUMMINGS ~

    Happy Thanksgiving Friends! There’s plenty to be thankful for!

  • Mike J

    Way to go guys,congratulation. Happy Thanksgiving

  • http://www.constitutionalrepublicans.org Walter GOP Livermore City-Chair

    Thanks Mike J. for all of your help and support! Here’s a couple of links from the SF Chronicle for your viewing pleasure:

    Today’s Article:
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/26/BA9414DDN1.DTL

    October 26th Article:
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/25/BAJM13JKBT.DTL

  • Jon Simon

    The irony is that this will, in the long run, hurt the Republican party as it gets more and more radical.

  • http://www.constitutionalrepublicans.org Walter GOP Livermore City-Chair

    Jon Simon, Your socialist platform is what is radical here.

  • Jon Simon

    Clever turnaround. Yeah, I’m so radical to support regulation of the financial sector. Let me go get my “I’m a Socialist – Ask me why!” button.

  • http://www.charles4council.com charles

    Jon Simon,

    I’ll speak for the minutemen. The liberal in the GOP can do what they want. All we want is support when we run candidates the local level. The liberal, pro-globalist, pro-bailout wing of the party can have the state and federal. We only want support when we run people for local office. This is the least the GOP could do for the ONLY conservative activists in the South East Bay!

    This November we got zero support from the county GOP. The county and state GOP spent their energies fighting us, tyring to keep us out of the Party. But, they still arent done yet!!!! Now they are busy rewriting the bylaws before we assume office to ensure we remain unrepresented within our own local party.

    Look. As far as I am concerned, the liberal GOP can go to bed with the Dems. They already have. It’s their game on the state and federal. Our strategy has nothing to do with these high level offices. We only care about local. Local, local, local. And we expect some kind of support from the county party when we run candidates. This year there was not ONE ENDORSMENT, ONE PHONE BANK, ONE EMAIL, OR ONE MAILER alerting local Republicans that a conservative, GOP member was running for office in Fremont. Though they will claim they sunk all their money into Abram Wilson’s race for State Senate, this is not true. They sent at least one flyer out for Steve Cho with no mention of other Republicans running (myself). They also conveniently “forgot” to invite the Minutemen candidates for city council and mayor to their endorsement night. This is pure obstructionism, and so far they have shown 200% desire to keep us out of the process even if it means a dog fight for the next two years. But I thank the GOP for teaching me how dirty and screwed up politics can be! Thank u…

    The bottomline is this: if this party is so power-obsessed that it can’t allow a single county to have a turn-over in leadership, that it can’t allow and will give zero support to local races where conservatives are running, then it’s pretty much over for that party anyway. How could we hurt it when it is doing an excelent job harming itself?

    We hope this changes, and like I said earlier, the Minutemen only care about our own backyard– local, local, local, and we hope now that the state and county GOP have lost, they might give us some kind of slack in the form of low cost support when we run these campaigns in the future! They don’t even seem willing to do this!

    PS. It is also very telling when someone like Jon Simon sides with liberal GOP establishment.

    PSS. Given the major transfer of wealth from working class people into the pockets of Wall street, maybe it’s time for a little, old-fashioned ‘radicalism’? I’m at the point of either giving up or kicking doors down against this highway robbery. How about you?

  • Jon Simon

    Charles,
    I’m not siding with the GOP, and there’s no such thing as a “liberal GOP.” I’m just pointing out the consequences of the Republican move to the right you guys are attempting. Aren’t you guys more Libertarian than Republican?

  • http://www.charles4council.com charles

    We’re a cross section of the Republican base. I am not a libertarian because I believe in moral restraint in economic matters and contracts. I believe there is such a thing as “exploitation”. I also believe in the 10 commandments and Christian religion. Most libertarians are ‘free spirits’. That being said, I cannot speak for the atheist and agnostics in our group, which there are many.

    I have a wide range of reading. You’ve asked me a couple times what my politics are, and I wrote a response. Just return to that old posting and check out the links I gave you. Also, my old website, http://www.charles4council.com has plenty of info there. You will see I am no libertarian.

    I do believe public oaths mean something and are not a light matter. If our officials vow to uphold the constitution, where is the ‘radicalism’ in keeping their feet to the fire? Right now we got officials who refuse to enforce the border, are retreating from the concept of a ‘nation-state’ (wanting bigger polititcal units, not smaller), do not flinch spending 10 to 50 billion dollars to ‘rescue’ or ‘embellish’ our traitorous ruling class, and generally agree we should be managed by a social engineering, centralist, technocracy.

    If you think opposition to these trends is ‘libertarian’, then you need to read up on Green political theory as well as traditional small, limited government conservatism. If you want to play the “left” vs. “right” fallacy, then go ahead and help retard any independent, future reform movement with your misguided, confused, and upside-down notions of political economy.

  • http://www.charles4council.com charles

    PS. ‘regulation of the financial sector’ is thebiggest con game of the century. Who do you think will sit on these so-called regulatory boards? Regulation= smoke screen for transfer of wealth and ransacking of the public treasury on behalf of super-rich private sector. Why else do you think the super-rich support neocons and the Democrat party? See this interesting Wall Street Journal article. Most the super-rich supported Obama! Meanwhile the ‘rich’ rallied around neocon, party liberal McCain. http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/10/13/the-rich-support-mccain-the-super-rich-support-obama/

  • Marty

    Jon, there’s blue dog Dems and socially liberal Republicans. Lines aren’t so boldly drawn. I’d like to consider myself as such an example.

    The greater question is where does our future president stand on the political quadrant. That is, if he stands at all:

    http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/scheer/ (“Obama picks foxes to guard henhouse” SF Gate 11/26)

  • http://www.castrovalleyminutemen.com Steve Kemp

    Jon Simon:

    Minutemen hurt the Republican party?? Are you kidding me? The Republicans have done all the damage that they could possible do – to themselves. What our party needs is a good ‘carpet shaking’ to replace the neocons and rinos with true conservatives.

    Although Bush did some good things, he and his Washington crew left our party in shambles. They had their chance and frankly, blew it.

    New blood is what’s needed, both Nationally and locally. Don’t mistake Minutemen with radicals (or racist and the opposition pushes down everyone’s throats). They’re traditionalist who care about the future of the country – not just themselves…

  • http://www.isil.org/resources/introduction.swf Starchild

    It’s always interesting to see the term “radical” used as some sort of insult. As Barry Goldwater noted, “extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.” People like Jesus of Nazareth (if he existed – see ZeitgeistMovie.com), Martin Luther (founder of Protestantism), and Thomas Jefferson were radicals.

    But of course to those Republicans intent on propping up the big government status quo that their party’s leadership has come to represent along with the Democrats, anything “radical” is bad, because it implies change, and they don’t want change.

    Personally I’m completely disgusted with the two-party cartel and its undemocratic efforts to shut alternative parties and candidates out of the political process via unfair ballot access laws, exclusionary debates, etc. I want nothing more to do with either branch of the cartel.

    But to those constitutional-oriented Republicans in the mold of Ron Paul who believe you can reform the GOP, I wish you luck. Just please don’t sell out by distancing yourselves from radicalism, libertarianism and so on. It may seem like a smart approach in the short run as you try to gain a foothold in the apparatus, but in the long run it’s a losing strategy. You’ll become associated with that which you are fighting, and voters won’t perceive the difference. A good strong dose of radicalism and libertarianism is precisely what the corrupt, bloated political establishment needs.

    Congratulations on the lawsuit victory, and keep socking it to ‘em!

  • Chuck

    Jon Simon is using the rehtoric of fear in order to silence dissent or creativity. Calling people who stand for sustanable population growth so the workers have some power in the economy”radicals” is just fearmongering.Mr. simon is using the same politically correct bootheel , as Jesse Jackson, to make sure the people have no voice in the political arena.People from across the political spectrum are calling for the borders to be secured, are all their voices all to be silenced by being tarred a radical.

  • Jon Simon

    There’s no rhetoric of fear, Chuck. The political philosophies Walter and others have espoused are radically conservative. You guys can keep saying your piece, and I’ll keep calling it what it is.

  • Marty

    Actually, Jon. There’s plethora of illegals in California, and the only conceivable outcome to the dearth of self responsibility that has been propagated by various leftist agendas is the eventual implementation of a rigid socialist government where we all work at the DMV, cant burn camp fires in the forest and are jailed or banished as a racists if we speak ill of The One. This is in addition to driving egg shaped cars.

    I don’t seen Walter’s observations that off base.

  • Marty

    May I add that articulating the future outcome of policies one disagrees with is not fear-mongering, but rather a natural component to critical thinking.

    If that weren’t the case, we’d certainly have:

    Pro-choice advocates predicting back alley abortions if late term abortions were illegalized.

    Al Gore predicting San Francisco submerged in 20 years.

    A Draft being reinstated if we invade Iraq.

    Gratuitous disregard for civil rights if the Patriot Act were renewed (150,000 Japanese disagree!).

  • bbox231

    Marty has got it going on – incredibly entertaining can we add to this list -

    Here are a couple that I vote we add to the list -

    WMD in the hands of Iraqis if we don’t invade (fill in the blank – your country of choice here).

    No P.D. and no F.D. unless we raise taxes.

    Osama Bin Laden

    … and my all-time favorite, “those that disagree with (you fill in the blank) shall burn in hell for all eternity.”

  • http://www.constitutionalrepublicans.org Walter GOP Livermore City-Chair

    It’s fine that Jon Simon and I don’t agree on things. I can respect that and I feel that disagreement is good not bad. What I don’t like about Jon Simon is that on any story (just about) he’ll throw out little one-liner jabs and insults about being “hateful” or “racist” or “radically conservative” because of ones beliefs. He calls the Minutemen names and throws mud in the faces of people who are actually involved in their own community, all the while Mr. Simon fails to notice that the Minutemen are made up of quite a diverse bunch of people. Just keep doing your thing Jon. I don’t think that you are fooling anyone here on this blog.

    “I don’t see Walter’s observations that off base.” — Thanks Marty!–

  • Jon Simon

    My irony sense is tingling. Didn’t I get called a socialist and Marxist? Just look at the Republican party’s record through the Nixon years on.

    As for diversity in the Minutemen, I’ve only seen seen a bunch of white “conservative” Christians. Perhaps there are a handful of others in the mix, but it’s about as diverse as the Republican’s national convention was. You all were oh so happy to chime in together that we live in a Christian nation, which we certainly do not.

    Charles is definitely radically conservative; just read his website. I assume he’s proud of it. And Walter, rolling back social programs in these troubling times lies far out of the mainstream.

  • Marty

    Jon, is there something wrong with white conservative Christians? I ask because of the way you phrased it: “a bunch of…” Is your hostility any different from Lois’ statements about a ‘bunch of brown skinned immigrants’ – a statement you would certainly deem racist.

    With all sincerity Jon, I believe you harbor a level of bigotry toward some Americans that is unmatched by those you fiercely oppose. Being left of center does not grant you a pass.

  • Jon Simon

    Marty,
    You read derision into the race, religion, and politics? OK, well, there is some for the politics, but also for the homogeneity of the Minutemen, who have claimed diversity. I think this gets to the core issue, which is that you guys don’t have a clear understanding of what racial bigotry is.

  • charles

    Hello Jon,

    I’ve also been to AHA meetings, and let me say they are far less ‘diverse’ than minutemen meetings. The Anti-Hate Alliance are 100% white, middle class, economically privileged, petty-bourgeoisie. I’ve never seen anything so lilly white in my life. LOL !

  • Marty

    Jon,

    How about two of my non-Asian minority study partners at JC being accepted to Cal in the late 90′s despite having lower GPAs and having fulfilled fewer requirements than myself and my Vietnamese friend? Does that qualify?

    Now, of course this episode isn’t akin to a real plight (jackasses on the left wont bring this boy down), and I dont consider myself a victim of bigoty. But the policy was racist, and it was born out of the very ideology that you celebrate.

    It’s prevalent in your posting here, and I believe you think you get a pass for the personal reasons you have alluded to, but also because you are left of center and therefore think you are fighting the good fight…as do the Minutemen.

  • Dave – Hayward

    Marty,

    You make an excellent point. Any public policies that categorize citizens by race are inherently racist. Affirmative action is no different from segregation. Both essentially say certain races “need not apply.” Unfortunately, asian-americans suffered the most from this ridiculous policy.

    Groups like the AHA are obsessed with race. They are filled with self-loathing white’s that feel guilty for slavery even though slavery ended generations ago. It’s almost like they believe in “corruption of blood” like old England…. Totally backwards.

    In present day politics, the Democrats (and groups like AHA) promote a hypocritical race based group-think and the neo-con Republicans promote fear of terrorism. When Obama was elected “liberals” kept saying it was a “great day for black Americans.” Doesn’t that imply that one should only consider race when voting for president? It’s a totally racist statement. Would it have been a “great day for white Americans” if McCain had been elected? It wouldn’t have been much different to me….

  • http://www.campaignforliberty.com Dan

    Many of us were waiting to get the word back on the lawsuit. Thanks for the update on the situation.

    We were very happy to see that Paul Cummings, and the RINOS were defeated. Now, we can start cleaning up the county GOP by throwing out all of the liberal leaning, fake Republicans on the commmittee.

    Keep up the great work Minutemen! You have my support!

  • http://www.charles4council.com charles

    Hi Dan,

    It’s not quite over. The county GOP is now trying to rewrite the bylaws before the new members assume office in January. Likely Cummings will pack the meeting with ‘ad hoc’ members to pass the new bylaws through. Unless I am wrong (I hope Cummings proves me wrong), the new bylaws will concentrate power in the chairperson.

    Likely the RINOS will preserve their party positions. Our concern are these:

    1. Conservative Republicans (small government, anti-globalist) have a voice in the Republican party.
    2. that the Republican party supports conservatives when they run for office, not suing us or otherwise employing obstructionist tactics to keep us away.
    3. If the neocons believe in ‘big tentism’, they genuinely practice it. So far ‘big tentism’ is talked about a lot, but in practice it’s a one-way street.

    The whole reason why we made the bid for the county party was we because the conservative voice of the GOP was being marginalized and ran out of the Party by neocon leadership. We simply did what talk show hosts having been talkign about for two years, “the Republican base taking back the party”.

    Although Central Committee seats are elected, Cummings and supporters believe using the election process is the ‘wrong way’ to join the committee. They feel the mroe legitimate way is to first volunteer and win the approval of the chair and local party leadership– securing the committee by appointment only.

    Unfortunately, political parties in CA are run by election and are suppose to be ‘representative’. I think the question of ‘representation’ is what is at stake here and who ‘controls’ the issues and strategy. While Cummings and ilk will talk endlessly about upholding the letter of the law, and how Minutemen are hypocrites, the real goal of the lawsuit was to sue us out of the political process. So, democratic representation and accountability are at the heart of the conflict here.

    I think Cummings and crowd feel they know how to run the party and elections in the Alameda County, and view us as riff-raff. They think conservative activists like Minutemen, evangelicals, or the Ron Paul liberatarians (all of which have an infusion of young people to offer), will ultimately give the GOP a ‘poor image’ and be ‘disruptive’.

    But what I don’t understand on conservative issues like ‘abortion, Amnesty, stopping welfare/bailouts, upholdig marriage, etc.’– these are issues that built the GOP over the last twenty years. If the ‘moderates’ of the GOP want to redefine it by dumping such single issues, then they basically intend to entirely destroy the existing GOP and then rebuild it, starting all over.

    I feel if moderates feel conservatives ‘stole their party’ under Reagan, then why did they invite conservatives in the first place? Now the so-called moderates or pro-socialist GOP are in a bind. I think McCain’s presidential campaign reflected the schitzoid delimma of the GOP.

  • http://www.constitutionalrepublicans.org Walter GOP Livermore City-Chair

    Hey Matt Artz! RINO Chairman, Paul D. Cummings Jr. has filed an appeal with the court contesting the Judge’s prior ruling!

    Hard to believe that this lawsuit was all about “holding the Registrar of Voters accountable.” The fake conservative, and self-proclaimed “liberal Republican,” is committed to creating divisions on the committee.

    The WAR continues….

  • Marty

    Charles or Walter, can you elaborate on the issue differences you have with the Cummings/RINO status quo? I understand the nature of this conflict, but it is not clear where you and the current GOP leadership part ways.

  • http://www.constitutionalrepublicans.org Walter GOP Livermore City-Chair

    Cummings has said that he would have never supported us (the Constitutional Republicans) because he had visited our website, and considers himself a “liberal-Republican.”

    You can visit our website, and view our platform, which is in close relation to that of the Republican Party platform.

    http://www.ConstitutionalRepublicans.org

    If Cummings considers himself a Republican, but doesn’t support the Republican platform, maybe he should re-register with the Democrats, his former party affiliation.

    To answer your question Marty… We part paths on just about every issue. We haven’t created an itemized list or anything, but it would be safe to say that we disagree more than we agree on things.

    One example: Taxes- We brought a motion to the floor to discuss passing a Resolution against the Governor’s planned tax-increase, which the committee failed to pass. To quote Dick Spees (the former Chairman before Cummings, who voted against the Resolution)… “We need to support the Governor, he has an R after his name.” Good ‘ol Dick Spees would rather side with our Governor and raise our taxes, as opposed to stand with our friends in the state legislature, who also have “R’s” after their names and are fighting to resist the tax-increase.

    Now Marty, if these so-called Republicans can’t even join together in opposition against a planned tax-increase, you can understand why I refer to them as R.I.N.O.s! Just because someone has an “R” after their name doesn’t mean they will act like a Republican.

    A few days after the failed vote, the CRP Board of Supervisors passed a Resolution of their own against the Governor’s planned tax-increase 14-2.

    I think that it’s time for Alameda County Republicans to start acting like conservatives!

  • http://www.charles4council.com charles

    I’ve been to a handful of county GOP meetings. I remember when Cummings and company voted to support Measure H in Hayward, raising something close to $50 million in Bonds to pay for construction upgrades in Hayward high schools. There was no debate on endorsement, not even a copy of the proposed measure for people to read. All that was said was “Republicans for too long have let the Democrats steal the show when in comes to funding schools and services. We can’t be left behind.”

    The question is if the party should stand on principle or simply what is expedient. If expedience or “doing the popular thing” is the only criteria the GOP has on deciding an issue, I think Republicans should make no claim to being ‘conservative’. Furthermore, Republicans cannot out beat Democrats over the title of who is more liberal. That’s playing the democrat game, and its a game, no matter how open-minded or foot loose they play, they cannot win. Another good example is the Amnesty. A lot of GOP are upset that House Republicans held a hardline vs. ‘normalization’/amnesty in 2006 and 2007. They blame this for the 2-to-1 margin hispanic vote for Dems.

    But what every election has shown since 2004, is that no matter how much GOP bends to cater to the so-called ‘hispanic’ vote, hispanics still vote Democrat. Meanwhile, when they play the fiddle on Amnesty, the loose a larger share of the conservative base’s vote than what they might gain from Hispanics. etc.

    Walter just broke new news to me. With Cummings appealing the verdict, this is likely to drag on for another six months… Geeesh! At this point the county GOP is just harrassing us.

  • tracy

    Way to go constitutional republicans!! I saw the story on ron paul’s campaign for liberty. Thanks to whoever left the link to this blog. Keep it going minutemen/ron paul supporters! You might actually be able to save the republican party from itself!

  • http://www.charles4council.com charles

    Of course if they get a favorable verdict before Jan. 20th, they will get their changes to the bylaws through no problemo; thus, insulating GOP neocons from further reform from the base of the party. Very convenient… especially considering our nation will be going through some of the worst and most radical restructuring of our political economy since the New Deal. I am sure ‘elites’ don’t want reform movements from the ‘bottom-up’ but rather keep it a well-managed crisis. Better to ‘snip it at the bud’. This may partially explain why the state GOP has been so persistant, both initiating and supporting the lawsuit throughout.

  • Jon Simon

    Who are these shadowy “elites” you love to speak of? Any names?

  • charles

    How about our Treasury secretary, Federal Reserve Chairman, presidential Chief of Staff, and our beloved VP, Cheney?

    I think that’s a pretty good rap list to start with…

    Jon, what is a regime? Can you define it? Do you think this ‘regime’ will change with Obama appointing Clintonites and Gates?

  • charles

    http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamamania-on-the-right/

    Is Obama a right-winger? See link.

  • Jonathan

    I knew that the constitutional Republicans would pull through! Great job guys!

    I see that Paul Cummings has filed his appeal now. This guy must really like you guys. Hey, look at the bright side of things, you just might end up having a California Supreme Court ruling on the books! Way to make a splash right off the bat!

    Try to keep us up on the latest news about the appeal. I’ll be pulling for you guys!

  • chris

    Constitutional Republicans? I guess that they’re not George Bush supporters. Bring back the constitution! Congrats on winning the suit!

  • Matt, Dublin

    i just got the word! great job on bringing home the big win! cummings’s appeal is his last ditch effort to save his own butt. i would give that clown the boot as soon as this is all over! the appeals court will laugh in his face, and you should be there to soak it all up! thanks for fighting on.

  • Jon Simon

    Charles,
    The regime is definitely changing, though Obama is trying to be inclusive, as shown by his appointments. No matter what, the Obama regime will be much different from the Bush regime. Due to our dire economic straits, it will also be different from the Clinton regime.

    The bailout has been a complete mess. It makes me sick. Still, it’s better than a complete collapse of our economy. That still may happen but isn’t likely.

    The public works projects that Obama will make are not socialism, at least not in my book, though obviously it is in yours. Obama is a pragmatist. Whatever works. He’s not an ideologue. Clinton was similar. I respect their ability to think and change course.

  • Marty

    “The bailout has been a complete mess. It makes me sick. Still, it’s better than a complete collapse of our economy. That still may happen but isn’t likely.”

    Just like Barack Obama. “I’m opposed to the bailout, but we need it”. Welcome to the next wave of Clinton-speak: Four or more years of a complete unwillingness to take a stand. A president who lives and dies at the will of public opinion. In *that* respect only will Barack Obama’s “regime” be different than George Bush’s.

  • Valerie

    Great job constitutional republicans! I was happy to see that our friends from northern cal won the election, and their court case.

    There have been some major changes with the L.A. G.O.P. too! WTG folks!

  • http://www.charles4council.com charles

    Thanks Valerie!

    Yes, I just got the news about LA. They did awesome, and made some really smart moves. They ran a very intelligent campaign. We kind of did a frontal charge, and that made things more difficult. It’s good to know the base has a voice in their own Party. Hopefully, the GOP will take a stronger stance against undermining USA soveriegnty via Free Trade Agreements and fight harder for small, limited Government. Interesting… Galvin Newsome yesterday was talking like a radical Republican. He was asking the city council to consider hacking 175 city jobs and slashing across the board department costs. I think this depression will force some needed shrinkage of government. Meanwhile, there will be an equal pull to spend our way out by borrowing and taxing. I think CA will see a major battle over property taxes. I personally believe both the property tax and income tax should be abolished. That’d be a great way to help first time home buyers hold on to their homesQ!

  • Jon Simon

    That’s hilarious, Charles. Somebody making 60k a year IF they’re managing to hold onto their job, who bought a 700k house now worth 500k, and is paying $4000+ a month in interest alone due to a variable interest rate, will be helped in a significant way by paying 8k or so less per year in property taxes?

    Those houses will be foreclosed upon. You’re basically proposing pouring that money into the hands of mortgage companies and interest backed securities, all at the expense of schools, police, fire, etc. Then, when that person does lose their job, they won’t be able to get training because there will be no government money to fund it. Their credit will be so awful, they won’t be able to get any loans to go back to school. The schools will be closing anyway since they won’t have funding. I just don’t understand why you think any of these ideas would possibly work in a fantasy world, let alone the real one. Then, when they’re sick and starving on lawless and deteriorating streets, with no health care and no food stamps, they can celebrate the property taxes they didn’t pay.

  • Marty

    Charles, abolishing property and income tax leaves… sales and corporate tax (which there is no such thing, it’s a consumer tax) to foot the bill for at least minimal services. Is this sufficient?

    And Jon, is there right now government money to “get training”? And, does property tax revenue fund these training programs? Is $8000 not equal to 2 months mortgage, and thus very significant? Your cascade of hypothetical events is pure fantasy as well.

    I bring this up because your posts juxtaposed contrast the extreme ends of your respective ideologies. One want no government, the other believes one’s survival depends on it.

  • charles

    Dear Marty,

    I believe government needs to go on a starvation diet.
    Constitutionally speaking, the federal government is only allowed a flat tax on income, apportioned according to the population of the states. Other than flat taxes, the only other tax allowed are tariffs. The federal government under such the constitutional restrictions would certainly have money, but it would be forced to be rather small and modest in its ambitions. I think it’s important for government to focus more on policing functions than infrastructure, and government is best where it is local.

  • marty

    Charles, were we not talking about property taxes, which are local? Shouldn’t the conversation be toward limiting federal tax in place of local taxes?

    Otherwise I’m with you. Not only do I propose a starvation diet, but I want all the state Dems spinning a recumbent bike to Ted Nugent’s greatest hits, while Tom McClintock prods them.

  • Mike

    Congrats to the Constitutional Republicans!! Conservatives finally have a voice in Alameda County!!