…but whatever the actual cause, California appears to have gone “off the rails.” For an appetizer, there’s this:
A recently amended California bill would add “affirming” the sexual transition of a child to the state’s standard for parental responsibility and child welfare—making any parent who doesn’t affirm transgenderism for their child guilty of abuse under California state law….
AB 957 post-amendment “would include a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity as part of the health, safety, and welfare of the child,” altering the definition and application of the entire California Family Code.
California courts would be given complete authority under Section 3011 of California’s Family Code to remove a child from his or her parents’ home if parents disapprove of LGBTQ+ ideology.
How is that not the erection of a political standard for parenting? Indeed, how is it not the institution of a California state-enforced religion? But wait: there’s more!
A new law in California will force those who make more money to pay more for their electricity.
Under the new rules, higher-income earners will pay seven times more than low-income earners.
If you live in California, how much you pay for electricity will soon be tied to much you earn. A state law passed last summer requires the California Public Utilities Commission, or CPUC, to approve a pricing structure that incorporates a flat fee with a sliding scale based on income.
Currently, Californians pay for the energy they use and the cost of upgrading the grid, settling lawsuits related to wildfires and providing assistance to low-income customers is built into the per-kilowatt-hour price.
Under the new system, however, funds for these programs would come from “income-graduated fixed charges.”
It’s an unprecedented move: In an April blog post, energy economist Ahmad Faruqui said more than 170 investor-owned utilities nationwide incorporate a fixed rate — the median being $10 and the highest $40.
None has an income-based component.
This is 200-proof Marxian socialism.
I shall repeat my recommendation of a few days ago. But in light of these suggestions, perhaps it should be strengthened. I’ll be back to this.
1 comment
“I shall repeat my recommendation of a few days ago. But in light of these suggestions,perhaps it should be strengthened. I’ll be back to this.”
I look forward to your doing so. The further down the current path the planet goes, the more convinced I become that decentralization of power is an absolute necessity going forward. While McMaken refers to the US as an entity in some sense, I submit that it never was, and never should have been, and that the Founders intended to establish a confederacy, not a nation. I could go on …