Democrats Vs. the People
The conflict didn’t start in 2016.
After Russia collusion, quid pro quo, “obstruction of Congress” and such, it’s clear that Democrats are still trying to overturn the 2016 election. It’s hard to blame them, given the great success of Donald Trump’s predecessor in the White House.
POTUS 44, formerly known as Barry Soetoro, put time back on the clock for Cuba’s Communist regime and helped Iranian mullahs with their cash flow, in exchange for exactly nothing. On the domestic side, the president’s eponymous health plan took away the right to choose. This prepared the way for his chosen successor, Hillary Clinton, to implement “single payer” and complete the complete transformation prophesied in 2008.
Hillary lost, Trump won, and Democrats still refuse to accept the voice of the people. Long before 2016, this rejection of the people was on display in California.
In 1978, when Jerry Brown was governor, soaring property taxes were literally driving people from their homes. Embattled Californians responded with Proposition 13, the People’s Initiative to Limit Property Taxation. This measure capped property tax rates for residential and commercial properties at 1 percent of the assessed value and prevented assessed value from growing more than 2 percent a year. The initiative also required a two-thirds vote of the legislature to enact any change in state taxes designed to increase revenues.
Proposition 13 mandated no spending or state hires, but Brown called it a fraud and a rip-off. In June of 1978, a full 65 percent of California voters approved the measure, a landslide victory. Governor Brown then proclaimed himself a born-again tax cutter but has since spearheaded a tax counterrevolution, and Proposition 13 remains under relentless attack from Democrats and their allies.
On November 4, 1986, California voters passed Proposition 63, the Official Language of California Amendment. This measure directs the state legislature to “preserve the role of English as the state’s common language” and refrain from “passing laws which diminish or ignore the role of English as the state’s common language.” A full 73 percent of California voters approved the measure, a landslide by any definition, but the people got no respect.
“In short, state legislators and public officials acted as if Prop. 63 never existed, “wrote Orange County Register columnist Gordon Dillow in 2006. Some level of proficiency in English is a requirement for American citizenship, in turn a requirement for voting. Yet, in 2016, the California voter guide came in English, Spanish, Korean, Chinese, Japanese, Tagalog, and Vietnamese. For 2018, Secretary of State Alex Padilla, a Democrat, added Punjabi, Hmong, Syriac, Armenian, Persian, and Arabic.
The University of California serves the top 12.5 percent of the graduating high-school class. Since the seventies, the UC had been rejecting highly qualified applicants and reserving spots for “minorities” not academically qualified. In 1996, Californians passed the California Civil Rights Initiative, Proposition 209, ending racial, ethnic, and gender preferences in state-college admissions, state employment, and state contracting.
University of California boss Janet Napolitano, a high-profile Democrat and former Arizona governor, derided the measure as a “legal barrier,” to “diversity.” Napolitano hailed a “partnership” with Mexico and made the UC a sanctuary system, founding and funding the UC Center for Undocumented Student Legal Services. The 4,000 or so illegals now in the UC system pay in-state tuition and Napolitano granted them a $25.2 million aid package, with no compensation from the governments of the illegals’ home countries.
In K-12, California had been teaching Mexican students primarily in Spanish, which hurt their prospects in higher education and the job market. In 1998, Californians passed Proposition 227, the English Language in Public Schools statute, which ended so-called “bilingual education.” Democrats have done everything in their power to block the measure and reforms through ballot measures now face more obstacles.
According to Attorney General Xavier Becerra, once on Hillary Clinton’s short list as a running mate, more than 10 million illegals reside in California. When the illegals get driver’s licenses, the DMV automatically registers them to vote. More than one million “new” voters were registered by 2018, but Padilla won’t say how many actually voted and refuses to comply with federal probes of voter fraud.
The Democrats give illegals welfare, taxpayer-funded health care, in-state tuition and protect them from deportation through sanctuary laws. In return, the illegals vote for Democrats and the ballot measures the want. The illegals function as the Democrats imported electoral college, canceling the vote of legitimate citizens and legal immigrants, blocking reform and keeping Democrats in power. Maybe that is what Michael Bloomberg had in mind when he called California “a great example for the rest of this country.”
Meanwhile, in 2020, Democrats don’t want the people to select the president. They want their party to remove the president from office, and some never-Trump Republicans will doubtless go along. As President Trump says, we’ll have to see what happens but one thing remains clear.
Under any Democrat running for office, particularly Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, you wouldn’t get what you want. You would get only what the government wants you to have. That was the plan of POTUS 44’s chosen successor, and that’s why Democrats have never accepted the voice of the people in 2016.