Eber: SB-54 on the fast track to becoming law

In a few short days “President” Brown is going to sign SB-54 into law—making cops that obey their oath of office a criminal in the eyes of the bigoted Attorney General, Becerra.  This is a bill to assure California, after October 1, 2017 goes bankrupt and files lots of lawsuits for the loss of billions of dollars—due to the State becoming a lawbreaker on the order of Bernie Madoff.

SB-54 with a couple of minor amendments has been passed by the State Senate. This measure would make California a “Sanctuary State” where law enforcement on every level would be banned from co-operating with ICE to deport convicted felons back to the countries where they came from.

Dangerous criminals would be returned after serving their sentences to the cities and neighborhoods where they committed these offenses.  Not only would taxpayers be paying the tab for their resettlement costs (family assistance and parole expenses) but local law enforcement would also become involved as statistically most of these people return to their former life of crime.

We are told it is not a big deal—because “only”” one third of criminals in jail and prison are illegal aliens, not the half that most believe.  Tell that to the victims of these criminals protected by the Democrats of Sacramento and many local governments.

Either we enforce our immigration laws—fairly and equally—or proclaim anarchy and Dawinism as the new law.

photo santcuary state

SB-54 on the fast track to becoming law By Richard Eber

Richard Eber, California Political News and Views,  4/11/17

How sad. SB-54 with a couple of minor amendments has been passed by the State Senate. This measure would make California a “Sanctuary State” where law enforcement on every level would be banned from co-operating with ICE to deport convicted felons back to the countries where they came from.

Dangerous criminals would be returned after serving their sentences to the cities and neighborhoods where they committed these offenses.  Not only would taxpayers be paying the tab for their resettlement costs (family assistance and parole expenses) but local law enforcement would also become involved as statistically most of these people return to their former life of crime.

What does Senate leader Pro Tem Kevin de Leon, who sponsored SB-54, have to say about it? In his words “we are making sure women and children are not separated by the policies of ICE.” This notion is absurd and ridiculous but few are aware of the dangers SB-54’s passage posses to society.

Unfortunately newspapers and local news coverage in California ignores almost all of this.  They prefer to push the narrative that California becoming a Sanctuary State will protect all citizens because it will enable undocumented residents feel secure dealing with local law enforcement agencies.  Nowhere in this Pollyannaish reality is any consideration given to the victims of crime or the dollars spent by taxpayers after SB-54 is enacted.

In the same breath one is to believe that the rights of those who are illegally residing in the United States parallel those who are regular citizens. Please tell me where in the world or what country has a similar policy to this?

The only voice of reason in the SB-54 debate  seems to be State Senator Joel Anderson (R-San Diego) who has opposed this legislation from the beginning.  His fellow GOP colleagues in the legislature agree with Anderson, but make few public comments on the subject. The State Republican Party, that prefers to avoid issues such as Sanctuary Cities, has remained predictably silent as well.

As if passing SB-54 were bad enough, there is a companion bill AB-946 which directs public employee pension funds California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) and State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) to liquidate investments in any company that contracts or subcontracts to build or provide materials for a border wall ordered by the Trump administration.

In effect the State is treating the Federal Government as if they are a state sponsor of terrorism such as Sudan or Iran. Even the left leaning League of California Cities rejected this measure by a 40-0 vote at a recent meeting.  Their members know that it will do them no good to be behind AB-946 when they apply to the Federal Government for matching funds when financing new projects in their communities. There was also concern that with the state pension funds so far in debt, hamstring them more with new restrictions might not be a good idea.

Only time will tell if SB-54 and/or AB-946 reaches Governor Brown’s desk, he would to sign them. Meanwhile Senator Joel Anderson is waging the good fight against SB-54, which was approved by the Senate, and is now before the Assembly.

In the past few days Senator Anderson has given the California Political News an update on the status of the Sanctuary City Bill.

Where do things stand now with it?

SB 54 is headed to the Assembly where it will be heard in Assembly Public Safety Committee and Assembly Appropriations Committee before it makes it to the Assembly floor.

  Have there been any significant amendments made to it? If so, what are they?

 While in the Senate, two significant amendments occurred.  They narrowed the list of known undocumented felons shielded by SB 54 and removed the urgency clause (2/3 vote threshold).  Now the bill may pass with a simple majority (50% plus one), but undocumented felons like human traffickers, elder and/or child abusers are still shielded.  The worst aspect of the bill is it continues to deny ICE agents the ability to interview felons to determine if they are undocumented in our prisons and jails.

What has been the reaction to the 31,000 plus signatures you gathered to oppose SB54?

Though the Senate Pro-Tem, who is the author of the bill, did not allow me to bring the petitions on the floor nor photos of the mountain of signatures gathered, the debate over allowing the No on SB 54 petitions on the floor helped me emphasize that Californians do not want our state to shield undocumented felons. It forced the bill’s supporters to acknowledge all 31,000 on the Senate floor. The fight isn’t over and we are encouraging people to continue to promote and sign our No on SB 54 petition on my website (www.senate.ca.gov/anderson).  I believe we still have a chance to kill it in the Assembly or with a veto.

Do you know of possible consequences to be passed by the Trump Administration

If the bill is passed?  What might the price be directly and indirectly?

California would not be eligible for many, if not all, federal law enforcement grants if SB 54 passes.  A minimum of $117 million and as much as a billion in funding for state and local law enforcement will be lost which will result in fewer police officers and sheriff deputies working to keep our neighborhoods safe at the same time we are returning deportable felons to our neighborhoods.

I understand there is also proposed legislation to order public employee pension funds

to divest stop holdings in companies those have contracts with the Federal Government to

Build the wall on the Mexican border.  How does Senator Anderson stand on this?

No surprise California’s Democrat supermajority continues to kill well-paying union wall-building jobs while protecting human and drug cross-border trafficking.

 If passed can he estimate what the effect might be?

With CALPERS and CALSTRS underperforming, any social or political divestments will hurt public employee retirements.  AB 946 Joint Authors Assemblyman Ting, D-San Francisco and Gonzalez Fletcher, D-San Diego will force greater financial burdens on local government where financial short comings must be made up.  Sadly in California where one supermajority party rules, it leads to poor decisions that hurt all Californians.

After listening to the wisdom of Senator Anderson, it can be asked can things get any worse for the State with new proposals from Progressives to rip apart the fabric of our society?  Good question.  Unfortunately, the day is still young for those who like to meddle as much as possible in their constituent’s lives.

Leave A Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.