Cheering Our Supervisor
For the first time in my life, I contemplated – albeit remotely – the possibility of moving out of state. Though I am not a politically motivated person, it is hard to ignore that the state in which I reside does not reflect my morals and values.
Case in point is last week’s vote by the state assembly on SB 1, the transportation funding senate bill. The bill raises the gas tax – the first raise in 23 years – by 12 cents a gallon. While I understand that California roads are in sad shape, let’s realize that though this is the first raise in the gas tax in 23 years, gas prices have indeed gone up in 23 years. So where did all of that money go? After all, California residents pay some of the highest per gallon prices on gas in the nation. And with that hike is an additional fee – you know, those costs that voters do not get to vote on – on vehicles. Fees range from $25 for cars valued at under $5,000 to $175 for cars worth $60,000 or more. All to raise over $50 billion for the improvement and repair of our roads.
But wait – this is a transportation bill. And isn’t the high-speed rail – our governor’s pet project – a mode of transportation? I for one am not convinced that any of the billions of dollars paid by California voters in these gas taxes and vehicle fees will be allocated for the betterment of our roads.
Then there’s SB 54 – Establishing a statewide sanctuary policy. This bill prohibits state and local law enforcement agencies, including school police and security departments, from using resources to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes. Like SB 1, it passed the assembly and senate.
Among the reasoning is that “Immigrants are valuable and essential members of the California community. Almost one in three Californians is foreign born and one in two children in California has at least one immigrant parent.” (See leginfo.legislature.ca.gov.)
I agree. However, I’m referring to illegal immigrants who are rewarded for illegally coming into our country. While I understand that many come to America because it is the land of opportunity, the fact cannot be ignored that our infrastructure cannot accommodate unbridled immigration.
Apparently, though, I am a lone wolf when it comes to this reasoning as both our Assembly Representative Laura Friedman and State Senator Anthony Portantino voted yea on these two beauties.
But on a county level, I applaud our district representative Kathryn Barger who was the lone nay vote on Tuesday on a motion that calls for county lawyers to develop a “sensitive location” policy. She stated, in part, that she was concerned about possible fiscal consequences and non-cooperation by the county with federal law enforcement authorities. She also voted against another motion to formally establish a task force to develop a countywide “immigrant protection and advancement strategy” by the end of the year.
“Rather than moving toward becoming a ‘sanctuary’ state and county in violation of federal law, both the state and the county should be leading the effort to initiate congressional action to enact comprehensive immigration reform,” she said.
Not an easy task to be sure, but at least it doesn’t hand over the brass ring to those illegally in our country.