CABPRO Report

Activist groups masquerading as nonprofit organizations

by Robert Wilder

The recent debate on the U.S. and state deficits, including California, has brought forward the issue of how activists and special interest groups systematically use the federal and state tax systems and obtain charitable status to promote their activities. This arguably means the average citizen in the U.S. is subsidizing these groups, regardless of their cause. We end up supporting groups that may be pro or anti-abortion, pro or anti-gay, pro or anti-war, or have other affiliations, through the tax system, regardless of our personal views as citizens.

We can all agree on the concept of charity and charitable organizations and the need for their existence. The question we have to ask ourselves is: What organizations deserve tax-exempt status? Should every kook with a cause be able to set up a nonprofit organization and fund it with tax-exempt contributions? Should activist and special interest groups with partisan agendas get the benefit of taxpayer dollars, tax-exempt status, and other subsidies without accountability? In my mind, any group receiving nonprofit status and the benefits government funds in any form should be non-partisan and represent all taxpayers, as we are the ones subsidizing a good part of their operation.

Nonprofit, or 510 (c) (3) organizations, according to the IRS, are supposed to be exempt from paying taxes if they are set up for charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals. Also, according to the IRS, the term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief to the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged, advancement of religion, advancement of education or science, erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works, lessening the burdens of government, lessening neighborhood tensions, eliminating prejudice and discrimination, defending human and civil rights secured by law, and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.

Here is a local example. I read that representatives from Claim-GV, APPLE, Wolf Creek Alliance, Sierra Fund, and the Green Party are having a panel discussion on the Idaho-Maryland Mine and showing a documentary called, “The Last Mountain,” a movie about mountaintop coal mining in West Virginia. Again, while I respect these groups' right to free speech, would it not be appropriate to have a mine representative participate in the panel, or some other neutral or pro-mining groups to balance things so the public can get some objectivity? And the idea of showing mountaintop coal mining and trying to compare that to the proposed Idaho-Maryland Project is ridiculous.

Claim-GV gets little or no credibility with the public in Grass Valley, other than from those who drink their Kool-aid. They continually misrepresent the project to the public, using scare tactics. For example, their picture of the proposed ceramics plant belching smoke thousands of feet in the air is a “Photo-shopped” picture with no scientific calculation to back it up. Claim-GV representatives even admit this when questioned at their booth at Thursday Night Markets. So, we, the taxpayer, are subsidizing an activist group with no ethics or morals, who have the sole goal of stopping a project that they do not like and they will say anything to do it (the ends justifies the means). This is regardless of the jobs, tax revenue, and environmental benefits (clean up of a legacy mine site) it will bring the community. Where is the accountability for the use of our taxpayer's dollars in this? I do not want my tax dollars subsidizing groups like this.

What is even more of a shame is that groups like APPLE, Wolf Creek Alliance and the Sierra Fund, that are potentially responsible community groups, get sucked into the vortex of Claim-GV's irresponsible actions. If the members of these organizations want to be dragged down and associated with the lack of ethics and morals represented by Claim-GV and their representatives, it is truly sad. Perhaps it is time for you to reconsider your association with Claim-GV and instead work proactively with the city and the mine to create the best project possible, and support our community?

We can expect over the next few years that tax reform will come. It is hoped that our politicians will look into the abuse of 501 (c) (3) organizations and revamp the tax regulations to better determine who should qualify for tax-exempt status. In the meantime, special interest groups need to realize that taxpayers are fed up with subsidizing them as charities when they are clearly not. It is time for them to take action to transform themselves into responsible and representative organizations.

Robert Wilder is a resident of Nevada County and a true Patriot.

Modern Poverty

by CABPRO Staff

Some interesting data about the "poor" in America. Despite the news reports of America's poor living in shanty towns and tent cities, the reality is far different.

"Data from the Department of Energy and other agencies show that the average poor family, as defined by Census officials:

● Lives in a home that is in good repair, not crowded, and equipped with air conditioning, clothes washer and dryer, and cable or satellite TV service.

● Prepares meals in a kitchen with a refrigerator, coffee maker and microwave as well as oven and stove.

● Enjoys two color TVs, a DVD player, VCR and — if children are there — an Xbox, PlayStation, or other video game system.

● Had enough money in the past year to meet essential needs, including adequate food and medical care."

A few relevant statistics; percentage of "poor" folks who have various items

65.1% have more than one TV
63%.7 have cable or satellite TV
54.5 have a cell phone
49.3 have a non-portable stereo
38% have a PC
29.3% have internet service
29.3% have a video gaming system

Let's not suggest that folks are having difficulty maintaining their lifestyle during these economic hard times.

Let's stop with the nonsense that someone with two TVs, cable TV service and video games is poor. These are the folks who receive taxpayer subsidies, what the left calls a "safety net".

I doubt that most taxpayers would consider satellite TVs and cell phones vital components of the social safety net. Most would consider food, medical care, clothes and housing a safety net.

It's time to be clear on what the current debate is all about and that is about redistributionism and socialism. Is it any wonder that the minority of folks who pay the taxes in this country don't want to pay more?

It's about time we had an honest discussion about what the objectives of our social policy are really all about because the current one, the one we have employed since the Great Society in the 1960s, has been plain old socialism. The debate today is all about how far we want to extend it.

(Sources: U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Census Bureau)

Get Government Out of Our Businesses

by Marc Cuniberti

Since 2007 the US government has either through loan guarantees or by direct
payment given Wall Street somewhere in the amount of 5 trillion dollars or
more. Violating about every free market rule there is, the government has
used public funds to bail out private firms, taken partial or complete
ownership of private institutions, illegally superseded contract law (GM
bond holders versus the unions), backstopped private debt instruments,
mandated private citizens and companies to purchase private services (health
care) and basically overstepped its constitutional authority in so many
areas, we are left wondering what country we live in.

Once the bastion of free enterprise and progress, the American Dream has
turned into the American scheme where honest hard-working Americans are now
used as cannon fodder for the Socialist onslaught.

Central bankers repeatedly "save the system" using taxpayer money with every
bailout.

The line of banksters lining up at the Federal Reserve for a handout of
public money is testimony to the theft taking place right under the American
Taxpayer's nose. Profits are privatized but when the bets go bad losses are
shuttled on to the backs of the public.

World improvers and politicians seeking reelection aim their misguided
agenda into the ranks of producing Americans, as what little honest profit
remains in this country lies in the hands of the honest worker.

Agenda 21 vs. the United States Constitution

by Judi Caler

Agenda 21, the global elite’s plan for a one-world government is accelerating at breakneck speed. Recently there have been SWAT-style raids and heavy fines imposed on family farms, private homeowners and businesses across America by various federal alphabet agencies in conjunction with local law enforcement. This is the manifestation of Agenda 21 in our communities.

Property has been seized and brutal police tactics used against unarmed, innocent citizens without just cause. This may be a 4th amendment violation of our constitutional rights which are designed to guard against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. The attacks we hear about are only the tip of the iceberg, as most victims are afraid to go public.

The food and agriculture community, which includes anyone who eats healthy and unadulterated food, is now being attacked by a wave of strangling USDA, FDA and DOT regulations which will end family farms and nutritious food as we know it. Most trusting Americans, and especially the younger generation—victims themselves of our public education system—will wake up when the regulations are implemented and wonder where their freedom went. This is tyranny; this is totalitarianism. We are in transition and there isn’t much time to fight back.

Agenda 21 is akin to an octopus with each tentacle attacking a different aspect of our lives, often at the same time. Picture a giant octopus in the middle of a city block. Each tentacle invades a different house. Chaos descends on each house with the occupants yelling “Help—giant snake attack!” Little do they realize the big picture—that one monster is in charge, using a multitude of tactics on multiple victims to achieve one goal. Whether the sector attacked is healthcare, education, land use, property rights, energy, food, water, the economy, guns, war, population control, ad infinitum, Agenda 21 is literally squeezing us to death. And because we lost education and the media long ago, most of the populace remains unaware. Without the internet, we wouldn’t know what was happening.

Obamacare and Doctors

by Martin Light

In the 1970s I worked in the financial division of a major university medical center and saw the beginnings of how doctors and hospitals had begun to be shackled and bludgeoned by excessive regulations and made to subsist on declining reimbursements.  Prior to that time doctors and hospitals could actually expect to be paid for their technical life-saving skills and expertise on a fee-for-service basis but today both are paid/reimbursed pennies on the dollar for those same services.

Folks, it isn't going to get any better but only worse unless Obamacare is killed by a spike driven through the heart of it.

Since the Social Security Act of 1965 was signed into law on July 30, 1965, by President Lyndon B. Johnson as an amendment to then existing Social Security legislation, doctors and hospitals have seen their incomes slashed.  Medicare was created to provide healthcare for the elderly and Medicaid (MediCal in California) was to do the same for the poor, however, these two programs substantially expanded the role of the federal government into the process of how doctors and hospitals were to be paid. For example, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 made several changes to physician payments under Medicare by introducing the mandated Medicare Fee Schedule which set reimbursement rates for services provided by doctors.  Up until then doctors and hospitals had been charging fair fee-for-service prices just like other highly trained technical experts.  Imagine taking your seriously ill family vehicle to the auto mechanic and expecting him to accept pennies on the dollar for skills you don't have but desperately need.

Over the years as doctors continued to serve Medicare and MediCal patients while being paid less than before, they have had to do something to make up for the loss in revenue in order to stay in business.  Although Medicare was never meant to be used as a guide for private health insurance payment schedules, insurance companies and health plans have been basing their rates of payment on those of Medicare.  As a result, doctors have had to painfully suffer the loss.  They can't even write the loss off.  The services basically never happened!  This is legalized theft and any physician with fiscal responsibility and a moral sense of the need to keep his craft capitalized knows it.  But, doctors attack disease and don't fight in this arena because it would seem uncaring.  They simply suffer quietly, but please recognize they still care intensely about us. The proof, they keep working, but it's making less and less sense.  It appears that they are having a harder time believing in themselves.
No matter how much we pay for private insurance, their payment to physicians is either slightly above Medicare rates (for better insurance companies) or BELOW Medicare rates. It is not uncommon for some insurance companies to pay 10-20% LESS than Medicare.

This Cartoon Seemed Far-Fetched In 1948

It's incredible that this 1948 cartoon has come this close to depicting our current day situation.  What can a cartoon, produced in 1948, teach us today, that's of any value?  Find out by clicking on the 1948 Cartoon.

Off The Top of My Head: Smart Meter Update

by Russ Steele

There is growing resistance to SmartMeters all across the county, with people worried about health effects from radiation, increased energy costs, impact of appliance changes, invasion of privacy, remote shutdowns and possible uninsurable consequences.  I will be examining each of these individually and then tell you a story about how we were helped by having a SmartMeter, which enabled us to secure a PG&E billing adjustment. 

First let’s review how smart meters work, as it will help us understand some of the above issues. [Note PG&E uses SmartMeter, for ease of reading I will use smart meter unless specifically referring to the PG&E meter]

SmartMeters measure your energy usage and send that information back to PG&E by wireless signals, instead of a utility meter reader coming to your property to manually read the electric and gas meters monthly.  Smart meters are just replacements for the older ‘spinning dial’ or analog meters, but with a twist or two.

In California these smart meters are not optional, and PG&E is installing them even when occupants do not want them, as these smart meters are vital to PG&E’s efforts to load balance a system which will become highly dependent on renewable energy sources. PG&E cannot turn on renewables like they can hydro or gas fired boilers as the demand goes up, so they need a way to reduce the demand by turning off appliances in your home.

For smart meters to monitor and effectively control energy usage via a wireless communication system, you must be willing to install power monitors with transmitters in your home. At our house we get letters from PG&E offering us money to install a thermostat that can remotely control our air conditioning system. This thermostat would have a radio transmitter to communicate with our SmartMeter in the garage, and then leaps to the PG&E control center via a wireless network.  Our answer was 'no way!'

Right now it is just the AC thermostat, but it could be any energy- using device in our home, washing machines, clothes dryers, dishwashers, flat screen TV, water heater, etc..   Over 90 appliance manufacturers have signed up to the Zigbee Alliance that makes chip and circuit boards which monitor appliance power usage and can transmit the data to a smart meter. Many companies in the alliance have agreed to put these monitoring transmitters in their appliances when they are manufactured.  These chips can automatically create a mesh network in your home, each sending information via wireless radio frequency signals back to a smart meter.

Remember 9/11/01

CA Fire Tax Unnecessary and Unfair

by Assemblyman Dan Logue

The arrival of California's wildfire season is a sober reminder of the importance of preventing such fires in our rural communities.  With the memories of past wildfires still lingering in our minds, I know we are all thankful for the bravery shown by our emergency responders who answered the call to save lives and homes.
 
Those who live in areas with wildfire danger have willingly borne the risks and costs of enjoying a rural lifestyle.  But I know that the last thing they need is a new fire tax on their homes that will do nothing to boost fire protection.
 
As part of the state budget, Governor Jerry Brown signed a measure that will establish by September 1st a new tax of up to $150 on structures located in "State Responsibility Areas."  These areas are located primarily in rural and unincorporated parts of the state such as Nevada and Butte counties.
 
The Democrats who passed this tax claim that it is only fair to have those who live in high-risk areas pay the higher costs of firefighting.  They framed their argument around public safety by saying that the revenues that this tax will generate will help keep our communities safe.
 
Their argument may be compelling, but it is a misleading excuse designed to manipulate public opinion.  When I studied the fire tax proposal when it came before the Assembly, I discovered two things.  First, the fire tax will not generate extra resources for firefighting efforts.  These new resources will simply replace the money that the Legislature took from the state firefighting budget to pay for welfare programs.

Releasing cold blooded killers back in your neighborhood

By Assemblyman Dan Logue

Liberal Democrats are just one vote away in the State Assembly from passing one of the most misguided public safety measures in California’s history – Senate Bill 9 authored by San Francisco Democrat Leland Yee.

This bill would allow murderers who were juveniles at the time they committed their crime and who were sentenced to life without parole to ask the court for re-sentencing up to three times.  Given the language of the bill and the long history of Democrats supporting efforts to weaken California’s tough-on-crime laws, SB 9 is just the latest attempt by them to prioritize criminal rights.

That is why I joined a number of public safety officials and organizations such as the California Police Chiefs Association and Crime Victims United to oppose this bill because it could give a slap on the wrist to dangerous criminals like Jimmy Siackasorn.

Siackasorn, who was 16 at the time, shot Sacramento County detective Vu Nguyen three times and killed him while being chased on foot.  He later told officers that he knew the detective was a police officer, and shot him because “he deserved it.”  Under SB 9, cold-blooded murderers like Siackasorn could petition the court for re-sentencing under the right conditions and not prove he has shown genuine remorse.  By just reading a self-help book and saying “I’m sorry,” he could have the opportunity to receive a lighter sentence.

The supporters of SB 9 would have you believe that it is about providing misguided people a chance at redeeming themselves.  While I believe in the power of redemption, it has to be accompanied by repentance, which cannot be guaranteed by SB 9.

That is because if you look beyond the rhetoric, you will see that the bill establishes weak criteria where many inmates would be entitled to a court hearing to reconsider their original sentence.  This criterion includes availing themselves of education programs in prison such as self-study – which is a ridiculously low standard to meet.  A prisoner meeting these guidelines does not have to prove that he has truly recognized the error of his ways.

Even worse, SB 9 could reopen the painful wounds of many crime victim families on up to three separate occasions.  If an inmate’s request for re-sentencing is denied the first time, he can try two more times, an agonizing ordeal for any family to go through.  Instead of showing compassion to criminals, I suggest showing some compassion to their victims and families, who deserve justice and who expect the state to uphold the people’s will.

SB 9 is not about ensuring fairness, but rather undermining the strong public safety laws that have kept the worst of the worst behind bars.  Keep in mind we are not talking about kids who broke into someone’s car qualifying for a reduced sentence, but potentially giving dangerous criminals a break who brutally murdered their victims.  That makes no sense.

Finally, the state already has a system in place to ensure that those who showed genuine rehabilitation in prison can have a shot at a lighter sentence.  Prisoners and their families can petition the Governor for a commutation, and previous Governors have granted commutations when the circumstances warranted it.

Although SB 9 fell one vote short of passage in the Assembly, it could come back for a vote in the near future if liberal Democrats can find one other moderate Democrat to vote for it.  I will continue to work with the public safety community and crime victim families to ensure that SB 9 does not get that one additional vote.  Keeping our communities safe must always remain our top priority.

Assemblyman Dan Logue, R-Linda, represents the 3rd Assembly District in the California Legislature.