California declares war on middle class

Columnist Victor Davis Hanson, classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, writes regarding California that about 150,000 households in a state of 40 million people pay nearly half of the total annual state income tax.

California has the ninth-highest combined state and local sales taxes in the country, but its state sales tax of 7.3% is America’s highest. As of April 1, California is now applying that high state sales tax to goods that residents buy online from out-of-state sellers.

In late 2017, the federal government capped state and local tax deductions at $10,000. For high earners in California, the change effectively almost doubled their state and local taxes.

Such high taxes, often targeting a small percentage of the population, may have brought California a budget surplus of more than $20 million. Yet California is never satiated with high new tax rates that bring in additional revenue. It’s always hungry for more.

Scott Wiener, a Democratic state senator from San Francisco, has introduced a bill that would create a new California estate tax. Wiener outlined a death tax of 40% on estates worth more than $3.5 million for single Californians or more than $7 million for married couples.

This information could well explain the exodus of Californians for greener pastures, notably Texas, which has no income tax.

California producers have been voting against the devastating taxes with their feet by pulling up stakes and leaving, taking their businesses and many employees with them.

Some have been concerned that employees following their jobs to other states, like Texas, would turn solidly Red states Blue.

Gov. Jerry Brown claimed in his State of the State address that 27 percent of Californians – 11 million of the state’s 40 million population – were born in a foreign country.

We suppose he was bragging about the fact that foreigners, many of them illegal, were filling the gap left by the productive workers, ready to take advantage of the freebies.

California’s social programs are magnets that draw in the indigent from all over the world, who arrive in search of generous health, education, legal, nutritional, and housing subsidies, Hanson explains.

But what really ticks off the taxpayer are the shoddy services they receive in return for their hard-earned money.

California is ranked in the bottom tier of states for schools and infrastructure.

If the old adage is true, what happens in California follows for the rest of the nation, you might conclude “Venezuela here we come.”

However, the Golden State has become a laughing stock rather than a beacon in America with its senseless one-party politics.

Apparently, one reason Republican registrations have dropped in California is so many conservatives are leaving.

That’s sad when you consider that one GOP president is a former governor of the state – Ronald Reagan – and California used to give Republican presidential candidates significant support.

Bill Barr should focus on 2 questions about spying on Trump campaign

Attorney General William Barr told the truth when he acknowledged in Senate testimony last week that federal law enforcement officers had spied on the Trump presidential campaign. High-ranking congressional Democrats expressed outrage (of course).

Barr said the question was whether it was adequately predicated.

Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation, writes:

“Whether you’re a Democrat or Republican – whether you support President Donald Trump or can’t stand him – you need to accept the reality that what Barr said is true. As Barr pointed out, the spying took place by both federal informants and secret electronic surveillance authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court.

The question of whether the spying was proper or improper is now what’s up for debate—not whether the spying occurred.”

And the only way to determine if the spying was proper is to examine how and why the investigation of the Trump campaign began–something Barr told senators he is doing.

Von Spakovsky says Barr has the responsibility to explore two questions:

First, did the FBI and the Justice Department have evidence to justify opening an investigation and counterintelligence operation looking at the Trump presidential campaign?

And second, did those who authorized the spying meet the requirements of the FISA law to justify electronic surveillance?

Spying on a political campaign is a big deal,” Barr told senators.

Everyone, regardless of their politics, should be “concerned about intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies staying in their proper lane,” Barr said.

Dictatorships spy on political opponents, throwing them in jail or sometimes even executing them. In democracies, governments are not supposed to use their law enforcement powers and massive resources against political opponents. It is vital that we adhere to this distinction and not let Uncle Sam turn into Big Brother, von Spakovsky adds.

Barr reminded senators of his “obligation to make sure government power is not abused.”

“I think that’s one of the principal roles of the attorney general,” Barr said.

Who can disagree with that.

Immigration reform coming?

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark,) has reintroduced a bill to reform immigration laws.

With the mess our southern border is in it couldn’t come at a better time.

While national media don’t report the mess at the border a few internet sites give a clearer picture of the activity of the cartels, including photographs of heads hung on spikes (apparently those who got in the way or didn’t cooperate). One has to wonder what it would take for some on the left to agree to the need for some restraint – maybe even a wall – to keep the intruders out.

Cotton’s bill is called the Raise Act. News coverage has focused on the number of legal immigrants it proposes, but that misses the bigger picture.

James Carafina, The Daily Signal columnist, writes:”

“Rather than bundle legal immigration, border security, and enforcement reforms into one comprehensive package, Congress should debate each area separately, allowing each to advance on its own merit. That’s the best way to keep a pro-immigration and pro-enforcement agenda on track.

We know from the news, however, that legal immigration reform is just one piece of the problem. The border is a hot mess. President Barack Obama’s former border chief, Mark Morgan, described the current flood as being “at a magnitude never seen in modern times.”

He adds:

“This (Trump) administration is, in fact, committed to partnering with Latin American countries—to grow economies, improve governance, expand economic freedom, and deal with the migration crisis. One clear example is increased U.S.-Mexico cooperation on processing refugee claims.

“So don’t despair. While the news on immigration and border security seems dour, beneath the headlines there is a growing movement to finally get migration under control.”

Does it seem that the problems America faces all lead back to the Obama White House?