New San Francisco ID cards for residents – whether in the country legally or not

New SF ID cards for residents – whether in the country legally or not
Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
(11-13) 15:56 PST San Francisco – –
The Board of Supervisors voted today to make San Francisco the largest U.S. city to issue municipal identification cards to its residents, regardless of whether or not they are in the country legally.
Supervisor Tom Ammiano, the legislation’s author, said the availability of identification cards is a smart public safety measure because it would make residents living on the social margins of San Francisco more likely to seek the help of police and could give them more access to banking services.
“People are afraid to report crimes,” Ammiano said, referring to illegal immigrants who avoid local law enforcement authorities over fear of being arrested or deported by federal immigration officials.
The legislation would require companies doing business with San Francisco to accept the municipal card as a legitimate form of identification – except in cases where other state and federal laws require other forms of proof of age, name and residence.
Under San Francisco’s sanctuary ordinance, it already is city policy that no municipal government personnel or resources may be used to assist federal immigration officials in the arrest and deportation of illegal immigrants.
Ammiano said banking institutions in San Francisco have signaled their willingness to accept the municipal ID card for the purpose of setting up accounts. He noted that people without bank accounts are frequently more vulnerable to theft and robbery.
The legislation, which was approved 10-1 on the first of two readings, has the support of Mayor Gavin Newsom. Supervisor Sean Elsbernd voted against the measure, noting afterward that his opposition was primarily financial in that the city doesn’t know how much implementing the program will cost.
The city of New Haven, Conn., began issuing municipal identification cards earlier this year.
Supporters of tougher enforcement of U.S. immigration laws argue that local identification card programs have the effect of legitimizing the decisions of people who entered or have remained in the country illegally and make it more difficult for the federal government to enforce those laws.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/11/13/BAB9TBP5H.DTL&tsp=1

Arnold Schwarzenegger Calls Out Liberal ABC News

ILLEGAL ALIENS ARRESTED FOR STEALING ‘FOOD AND WATER’ AT EVACUATION CENTER IN CALIFORNIA

Six illegal immigrants arrested at Qualcomm
San Diego:
Six undocumented Mexican immigrants were arrested today by U.S. Border Patrol agents at Qualcomm Stadium, after a report that they were stealing food and water meant for evacuees, according to spokesman Damon Foreman. San Diego police responded to a call about alleged theft from the evacuation center and encountered six people in a van who didn’t speak English and didn’t have California driver’s licenses, Foreman said. The police officers called the Border Patrol, who arrived at the stadium and made the arrests, he said. Foreman said the immigrants admitted they were Mexican citizens and that they were stealing.
Border Patrol agents are not looking for illegal immigrants at the center but will continue responding to police calls for assistance.
“We are not in any means at Qualcomm for enforcement capacity,” he said. “We are not there to take advantage of a situation.”Foreman said the agents have been helping in the evacuation and rescue effort in addition to carrying out their main duties. “We are dedicated to our primary mission to securing our borders,” he said.
– Anna Gorman

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/breakingnews/2007/10/six-undocumente.html

Democrat Harry Reid Blames California Wildfires on Global Warming

Wildfires get personal for lawmakers
By Jonathan E. Kaplan
October 24, 2007
Rep. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) woke up at 2:30 on Tuesday morning to see the hillside behind his house glowing with fire and flames shooting as high as 50 feet in the air. He then watched as the fire ran to the top of the ridge of the hill and raced back down the other side. McKeon, who returned to Washington on Tuesday afternoon, said in a phone interview that 25 structures had been destroyed and maybe 15,000 people evacuated from his district.
According to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger reported late Tuesday that 750 homes had been totally destroyed, 68,000 homes were in danger, and 250,000 acres of land had been devastated by the fire, much of it wilderness. In addition, 365,000 people have been evacuated from their homes.President Bush declared a state of emergency in California and sent Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator David Paulison to San Diego on Tuesday.Pelosi said that Congress could have to consider sending more aid to California. “So far, [state officials] have been able to avail themselves of whatever is available from the federal government. We may have to expand on that as the fires continue to rage,” she said Tuesday on the House floor.Local emergency officials in San Diego briefed lawmakers from the area on Tuesday evening at the emergency response center there.The California congressional delegation is drafting a resolution expressing Congress’s support for the first responders and pledging to make resources available to help stop the fires, congressional officials said.Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) asked the Bush administration to “do everything within [its] power to immediately release all resources and provide all possible assistance to those fighting to protect lives and property…Additional ground and air resources are desperately needed.”Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), a presidential candidate, remained in California, where he successfully cajoled the National Guard to send six C-130 jets from North Carolina, Wyoming and Colorado to help drop flame retardant to stop the fires from spreading. California’s C-130s were not equipped to fight fires.“We could use more – more of everything,” McKeon said.The fires have not spared anyone, including lawmakers.“The magnitude of these fires are unmatched by anything I have ever seen in my lifetime,” Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.) said, adding that he had never seen the Santa Ana winds, which carry hot desert air, blow as hard. Some gusts clocked in at 101 miles per hour, and the winds carry embers, which spark new fires.“Everything is covered in ash. The smell of smoke is overwhelming,” said Gallegly, whose home is ready to be evacuated quickly. “There is a lot of wind damage, too.”Other lawmakers were trying to protect their aides and constituents by keeping their offices open later and trying to provide as much updated information as possible on their websites.Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who flew to Washington on Sunday from San Diego, could see the fire rage from both sides of the plane, but he did not expect either fire to spiral out of control. Meanwhile, Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.) was forced to shutter temporarily his district office after it lost power on Monday. Issa and Bilbray returned to California Tuesday afternoon.Asked what Congress could do in Southern California, Issa said Congress has two tools, money and regulation, before adding that, “We can’t make it rain.“It’s hot, it’s dry and people had eucalyptus near their homes,” Issa said, referring to the combustible plant.Democratic Rep. Susan Davis, who represents San Diego and was trying to get home as quickly as possible, was monitoring the 10,000 people who had been evacuated to Qualcomm Stadium, a mere eight minutes from her home.Many lawmakers said the smoke and ash resulted in poor air quality from San Diego to as far north as Venice, Calif., where Rep. Jane Harman (D) could see smoke on Sunday from the massive fires raging across southern California. She said the fronds from the palm trees have blown all over the streets.For now, the fires remain a state and local concern with the federal government playing a coordinating role.“The most important thing Congress can do is to make sure that local officials are not making decisions based on financial resources, but keeping focus and attention on saving lives,” said Mark Merritt, president of James Lee Witt Associates and a former FEMA official.Congress could choose to pass an emergency appropriations bill to pay for damages that FEMA programs would not cover, but for now California has in place a “well-greased system when fighting wildfires,” Merritt said.Officials said Tuesday the winds and high temperatures are expected to continue. But when the fires do stop, lawmakers likely will debate the cause of the fire. “One reason why we have the fires in California is global warming,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Tuesday, stressing the need to pass the Democrats’ comprehensive energy package.Moments later, when asked by a reporter if he really believed global warming caused the fires, he appeared to back away from his comments, saying there are many factors that contributed to the disaster.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/wildfires-get-personal-for-lawmakers-2007-10-24.html

CNN MEMO: USE FIRES TO ‘PUSH’ ‘PLANET IN PERIL’ SERIES; DON’T ‘IRRESPONSIBLY’ TIE TO GLOBAL WARMING

CNN MEMO: USE FIRES TO ‘PUSH’ ‘PLANET IN PERIL’ SERIES; DON’T ‘IRRESPONSIBLY’ TIE TO GLOBAL WARMING
Thu Oct 18 2007 14:11:42 ET

According to notes from CNN’s Monday news meeting network president Jon Klein tells employees to use the California fire tragedy to “push” their “Planet in Peril” special, but warns reporters not to “irresponsibly link” the fires to “Global Warming.”

Liberal CNN Predicts Possible ‘Century of Fires’ Due to Global Warming

CNN Predicts Possible ‘Century of Fires’ Due to Global Warming

Anderson Cooper and Tom Foreman warn that global warming may be to blame for Southern California fires.

By Paul Detrick Business & Media Institute10/24/2007 12:58:19 PM

CNN exploited a national tragedy on October 23 by finding a way to blame global warming for wildfires.

During the October 23 “Anderson Cooper 360: In the Line of Fire,” Cooper reported from Southern California saying, “People are wondering if these fires are a result of global warming in some way.”

Although Cooper admitted that, “no one really knows for sure,” the broadcast still took the time to predict the future with CNN’s Tom Foreman who warned of a possible “century of fires, just like what we’re seeing now” as a result of global warming.

“Climatologists say, while we can’t blame on fire on climate change, we can say that these factors are combining in that area [Southern California] to set up what could be a century of fires just like what we’re seeing now,” said Foreman.
Foreman cautioned viewers that, “greater periods of rain” that fuel “increased vegetation growth” over the next century may provide a “potential link between these fires and global warming.”
He then pointed to a map showing “plant growth is expected to double or even triple as a result of greater periods of rain, driven by climate change.”

Earlier in the broadcast Cooper also plugged CNN’s documentary:

“At the top of the next hour, as I said, the big picture. These fires are really a piece of it. Fire, drought, global warming, climate change, deforestation, it is all connected, tonight, 9:00 p.m. Eastern…‘Planet in Peril’ starts in just 30 minutes.”
But was there a source refuting the claims that global warming was to blame for the fires in California? Nope. Not one.
Alan Zarembo’s story in the Washington Spokesman-Review that was attributed to the Los Angeles Times asked a similar question to Cooper’s broadcast, “Are the massive fires burning across Southern California a product of global warming?”
But, Zarembo came up with a much different answer:
“Scientists said it would be difficult to make that case, given the combustible mix of drought and wind that has plagued the region for centuries or more,” said the reporter.
“Southern California is already perfect for wildfire, and the small changes from global warming are unlikely to make it much worse at this time.”
A climate scientist at the University of California, Merced, told Zarembo that these wildfires are the result of two “staples of the region’s climatic history,” meaning “strong Santa Ana winds” and “a drought that turned much of the hillsides to bone-dry kindling.”
“Neither can be attributed to climate change,” said the UC Merced professor.
The Media Research Center’s Brent Baker wrote on October 23 that “NBC Nightly News” also made the case linking global warming to the California fires.

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2007/20071024110403.aspx

State Bar of California and Civil Rights Group Spar Over Racial Preferences for Blacks in Law School Admissions

State Bar of California, Civil Rights Group Spar Over Affirmative Action
Tuesday , October 16, 2007
By William LaJeunesse
Does affirmative action work? An explosive study that suggests it does not is pitting the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights against the State Bar of California in a battle over admissions data that could determine once and for all if racial preferences help or hurt minority students.
“Currently only about one in three African-Americans who goes to an American law school passes the bar on the first attempt and a majority never become lawyers at all,” says UCLA law professor Richard Sander.
In an article published in the Stanford Law Review, Sander and his research team concluded several thousand would-be black lawyers either dropped out of law school or failed to pass the bar because of affirmative action.
Known as the ‘mismatch’ effect, Sander claims students who are unprepared and whose academic credentials are below the median are admitted to law schools they are unqualified to attend. If those same students instead were to go to less elite or competitive schools, more would graduate, pass the bar and become lawyers.
“This is a serious issue and we need to see more research in the area of mismatch,” argues Gail Heriot, a professor of law at the University of San Diego and a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. “What we need now is more cooperation from the California Bar” Association.
Recently, a California bar committee voted 5-3 to turn down Sander’s request to use bar data collected over the last three decades on student test scores, law school admissions, academic performance and bar passage rates.
The data, considered a gold standard by affirmative action researchers, is considered key to determine if racial preferences work.
“There is no answer but to give him the information,” says black civil rights attorney Leo Terrell. “What is the state bar afraid of? We need to know.”
But the Bar refuses to give Sander the data.
“The release (bar exam) applicants sign does not allow us to release the information to third parties,” Whitnie Henderson told FOX News. “Looking at all the information we just decided it was not something that fit within the committee’s purview.”
Henderson headed the committee that rejected Sander’s request. Contrary to her statement, twice in the last 15 years the California Bar released individual information to outside researchers.
Law Professor Vikram Amar at UC Davis believes the Bar rejected Sander’s request because the study is “controversial,” examining the huge disparities in bar passage among different racial groups attending the same law school.
Law schools do not disclose attrition, graduation and bar passage rates to minorities admitted through preferences and have opposed pressure to do so. About 62 percent of today’s top black lawyers attended the most elite U.S. law schools, according to Law Professor Richard Lempert at the University of Michigan.
Unlike Sander, Lempert believes the number of black lawyers would decrease if affirmative action ended. He says race, ethnicity and LSAT scores do not predict future income or satisfaction.
The Board of Governors of the California Bar may reconsider Sander’s request during its November meeting, but for now no one can say whether affirmative action actually does what’s intended.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C301722%2C00.html

‘Mom’ and ‘Dad’ banished by California Law Signed by Liberal Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger because it is a term perceived as negative to gays

‘Mom’ and ‘Dad’ banished by California

Schwarzenegger signs law outlawing terms perceived as negative to ‘gays’
Posted: October 13, 20071:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
“Mom and Dad” as well as “husband and wife” have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose.
“We are shocked and appalled that the governor has blatantly attacked traditional family values in California,” said Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute.
“With this decision, Gov. Schwarzenegger has told parents that their values are irrelevant. Many parents will have no choice but to pull their children out of the public schools that have now become sexualized indoctrination centers.”
“Arnold Schwarzenegger has delivered young children into the hands of those who will introduce them to alternative sexual lifestyles,” said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, which worked to defeat the plans. “This means children as young as five years old will be mentally molested in school classrooms.
“Shame on Schwarzenegger and the Democrat politicians for ensuring that every California school becomes a homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination center,” he said.

Analysts have warned that schools across the nation will be impacted by the decision, since textbook publishers must cater to their largest purchaser, which often is California, and they will be unlikely to go to the expense of having a separate edition for other states.
The bills signed by Schwarzenegger include SB777, which bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as negative toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other alternative lifestyle choices.
There are no similar protections for students with traditional or conservative lifestyles and beliefs, however.
“SB 777 will result in reverse discrimination against students with religious and traditional family values,” said Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Institute. “These students have lost their voice as the direct result of Gov. Schwarzenegger’s unbelievable decision. The terms ‘mom and dad’ or ‘husband and wife’ could promote discrimination against homosexuals if a same-sex couple is not also featured.
“Parents want the assurance that when their children go to school they will learn the fundamentals of reading, writing and arithmetic – not social indoctrination regarding alternative sexual lifestyles. Now that SB777 is law, schools will in fact become indoctrination centers for sexual experimentation,” she said.
Also signed was AB394, which targets parents and teachers for such indoctrination through “anti-harassment” training, CCF said.
Schwarzenegger had vetoed almost identical provisions a year ago, saying existing state law already provided for penalties for discrimination.
“We had hoped that the governor would once again veto this outrageous legislation but he obviously decided to side with the out-of-touch extremists that control the legislature. This law does not reflect the true values of the average Californian,” said England. “True leadership means standing up for what is true and right.”
Thomasson said SB777 prohibits any “instruction” or school-sponsored “activity” that “promotes a discriminatory bias” against “gender” – the bill’s definition includes cross-dressing and sex changes – as well as “sexual orientation.”
“Because no textbook or instruction in California public schools currently disparages transsexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality, the practical effect of SB777 will be to require positive portrayals of these sexual lifestyles at every government-operated school,” CCF noted.
Offenders will face the wrath of the state Department of Education, up to and including lawsuits.
CCF noted that now on a banned list will be any text, reference or teaching aid that portrays marriage as only between a man and woman, materials that say people are born male or female (and not in between), sources that fail to include a variety of transsexual, bisexual and homosexual historical figures, and sex education materials that fail to offer the option of sex changes.
Further, homecoming kings now can be either male or female – as can homecoming queens, and students, whether male or female, must be allowed to use the restroom and locker room corresponding to the sex with which they choose to identify.
AB394 promotes the same issues through state-funded publications, postings, curricula and handouts to students, parents and teachers.
It also creates the circumstances where a parent who says marriage is only for a man and a woman in the presence of a lesbian teacher could be convicted of “harassment,” and a student who believes people are born either male or female could be reported as a “harasser” by a male teacher who wears women’s clothes, CCF said.
Thomasson said Schwarzenegger also signed AB14, which prohibits state funding for any program that does not support a range of alternative sexual practices, including state-funded social services run by churches.
Affected will be day cares, preschool or after-school programs, food and housing programs, senior services, anti-gang efforts, jobs programs and others.
Thomasson said it also forces every hospital in California – even private, religious hospitals – to adopt policies in support of transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality and opens up nonprofit organizations to lawsuits if they exclude members that engage in homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual conduct.
“It’s the height of intolerance to punish individuals, organizations, businesses, and churches that have moral standards on sexual conduct and sexual lifestyles,” said Thomasson, in response to the signing of AB14. “This is another insensitive law that violates people’s moral boundaries.”
The vitriol over the issue rose to new levels in its latest campaign.
As WND reported, a board member for the homosexual advocacy group Equality California verbally attacked and threatened CRI for its opposition to the bill earlier.
The board member sent an e-mail and video to CRI threatening the group would be buried if it continued efforts opposing the homosexual advocacy.
“The shocking hate mail we received shows that those behind this legislation do not promote true tolerance,” said England. “Only politically correct speech will be tolerated. Those with religious or traditional moral beliefs will not be allowed to express their opinions in public schools.”
She also cited an informational document published by the Gay-Straight Alliance Network and the Transgender Law Center that already is lobbying for special treatment in the school system.
“If you want to use a restroom that matches your gender identity … you should be allowed to do so,” it advises. “Whenever students are divided up into boys and girls, you should be allowed to join the group or participate in the program that matches your gender identity as much as possible.”
Further, the groups advise, “If you change your name to one that better matches your gender identity, a school needs to use that name to refer to you.” The advocacy group also warns schools against bringing parents into any such discussion with students.
WND has documented a number of earlier cases in which educators, including leaders in California, have taken it upon themselves to promote a homosexual lifestyle to children under their charge.
WND reported California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell, under whose supervision hundreds of thousands of children are being educated, has used his state position and taxpayer-funded stationery to praise a “gay” pride event used in the past to expose children to sexually explicit activities.
That drew vehement objections from several educators, including Priscilla Schreiber, the president of the Grossmont Unified High School District governing board.
“I am outraged that a person in this high-ranking elected position would advocate an event where diversity is not just being celebrated but where pornography and indecent exposure is being perpetrated on the young and innocent children of our communities,” she said.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58130

Meet the Democrat candidates for mayor of San Francisco

RINO Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger signs California state law barring landlords from asking tenants’ immigration status

State law bars landlords from asking tenants’ immigration status
By Juliana Barbassa
ASSOCIATED PRESS
6:26 p.m. October 11, 2007
SAN FRANCISCO – California is again forging its own path on immigration reform by becoming the first state to prohibit landlords from asking tenants’ immigration status.
Amid frustration over the federal government’s failure to reform immigration laws, cities across the country have taken their own action to keep out illegal immigrants, including barring property from being rented to undocumented tenants.
The law signed this week by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenneger elicited a sigh of relief among landlord associations concerned that without it, they’d be forced to take on the cost and the liability of enforcing federal laws as “de-facto immigration cops,” said Nancy Ahlswede, executive director of the Apartment Association, California Southern Cities.
“We have huge anti-discrimination obligations,” said Ahlswede, whose organization was among the legislation’s sponsors. “We understand the frustration, but that burden shouldn’t be placed on landlords.”
California has often staked new ground on immigration, whether with anti-immigration measures like Proposition 187, a 1994 ballot initiative meant to deny illegal immigrants social services, health care, and public education, or by hosting massive pro-immigration rallies and promoting trends like the “New Sanctuary Movement,” in which churches seek to protect undocumented immigrants from deportation.
The state has more immigrants than any other, and between 2.5 to 2.8 million of them are undocumented, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.
This latest law pushes against a national trend that finds tensions over immigration and shifting demographics increasingly being dealt with on a city-by-city and issue-by-issue basis. The law also specifies that landlords can’t, on their own, decide to verify prospective tenants’ immigration status.
More than 90 cities or counties nationwide have considered ordinances that aim to discourage illegal immigrants from settling by making their daily life more difficult. Those include rules forbidding renting to undocumented immigrants, punishing businesses that hire them or requiring police to ask about immigration status.
Proponents of immigration control view the California law as another attempt to block citizens from defending their interests in an area where the federal government has failed.
“It’s clear that Washington, D.C. doesn’t want to deal with this problem,” said Rick Oltman, with Californians for Population Stabilization. “You have cities that want to deal with the problem and this bill would stop them, making them powerless to deal with the illegal alien community.”
This view is reflected across the country. Hazleton, Pa., for example, has become a city whose name is synonymous with local action against unauthorized immigration.
Hazleton passed an ordinance last year penalizing landlords who rent to them and employers who hire them. The rule was struck down in federal court as unconstitutional. The city is appealing, and a hearing is expected in the spring.
California’s law “certainly adds salt to the wound for mayors who are trying to protect their legal residents and their budgets from the burden of illegal immigration,” said Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta.
The mayor is hoping to take the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court, aiming for a ruling that would bring relief to cities around the country trying to follow the same path.
But organizations that have taken local governments to court on the issue argued laws asking landlords to pry into their tenants’ immigration status infringes privacy and discrimination statutes, and pre-empts the federal government’s authority.
“If the federal government wants to go after someone, they can do that, but a city can’t,” said Kristina Campbell, an attorney with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, who worked on the lawsuit against Escondido, Calif., which also passed an ordinance punishing landlords who rent to undocumented immigrants.
The suit was settled out of court when costs ballooned, city officials said.
Generally, any proposition that orders those not trained in immigration law to determine whether an immigrant is in the country legally is fraught with potential problems, immigrant advocates said.
The law is complicated and a property owner trying to hazard a guess about someone’s immigration status could rely on someone’s looks or their accent, leading to discrimination, said Reshma Shamasunder, director of the California Immigrant Policy Center.
Greg McConnell, who has two rental properties and helped organize landlords in Berkeley to support the bill, said he’s just glad to be out of the cross-hairs of a “bitter and inflammatory” debate that’s much larger than they are.
“It’s not a question of where landlords stand on the immigration issue, it’s a question of who’s to enforce those laws,” he said

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20071011-1826-ca-rentingtoimmigrants.html