Oakland’s police chief Anthony Batts has announced that Oakland Police will not responded to 44 different crimes if planned layoffs occur at midnight. It was useful for Batts to announce the categories in advance for criminals to chose from a criminal dim sum list of free crimes including grand theft, burglary, vehicle collision, identity theft and vandalism.
If you are the victim of burglary, you will be told to make a report online and not to expect police to respond.
Here the list of free crimes in Oakland:
burglary
theft
embezzlement
grand theft
grand theft:dog
identity theft
false information to peace officer
required to register as sex or arson offender
dump waste or offensive matter
discard appliance with lock
loud music
possess forged notes
pass fictitious check
obtain money by false voucher
fraudulent use of access cards
stolen license plate
embezzlement by an employee (over $ 400)
extortion
attempted extortion
false personification of other
injure telephone/ power line
interfere with power line
unauthorized cable tv connection
vandalism
administer/expose poison to another’s
That allows ample room for most criminals to plan a life of crime without the risk of police interference.
This is the response to the planned layoff of 80 officers. That is roughly one-tenth of the force. As we continue to gush billions in Afghanistan and Iraq, our cities are returning to a state of nature. According to the city of Oakland, each of the 776 police officers currently employed at OPD costs around $188,000 per year. The city council asked OPD officers to pay nine percent of their salary toward their pensions. However, the union would only agree if the city promised no layoffs. The city refused.
Source: NBC.
Buddha:
those are pretty good especially 1 & 2. #9, I think, would lead to chaos. But the problem I see is that we have been legislating this stuff for years, making laws and trying to control the populace by various means. And we find ourselves in a bad predicament nonetheless.
What makes you think you can do any better? (I don’t mean that in a mean way at all). Your proposals for the most part are going to require legislation to implement them, we are then back to square one with command and control from the top. It always fails.
“Life, faculties, production—in other words individuality, liberty, property—that is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it.”
Frederic Bastiat, The Law
“Mankind’s history is one of systematic, arbitrary
abuse and control by the elite acting privately, through the
church, but mostly through government.”
Walter Williams
Instead of a platform why not just simply restore the Constitution to it’s once prominent place in our society and let nature do the rest?
All you will accomplish is to become “them” which is to say trading one master for another. A pack mule doesn’t really care if the burden is 100 pounds or 75 pounds.
Slarti,
I’ll admit I mulled it over quite a bit and that’s a valid concern. That’s one of the reasons I’m floating it early. This is #10 for the very reason it’s easily the most controversial plank. Easier to amend the platform now than when we’ve got a candidate at risk.
Sorry about that – hit return on the wrong keyboard.
My concern would be that politicians would become even more tied to polls for fear of casting an unpopular vote and being recalled.
Buddha,
My concern would be the 1
Smom,
Those items will be addressed in the Principle Statement.
Slarti,
I think it’s necessary because it gives a mechanism for disposing of either a malfunctioning Executive or Congress before the end of term. As a practical matter, I’m not so much for the mechanism precisely as described for Congress. As a practical matter, the right to a no confidence vote could be cascading as follows:
The House – Each Representative can be voted on No Confidence and recalled by their state legislature forcing an interim election.
The Senate – The House (or a State Legislature) can vote for No Confidence in the Senate and force a recall election and/or dissolution (in the case of a House vote).
The President – The Senate (or alternatively the House and Senate) can vote for No Confidence in the Executive and force a recall election and resignation.
Kind of Impeachment Light with a replacement plan.
Sounds good to me except for 9. No mention of gay marriage or abortion rights though.
Mike,
Thanks. Here’s the short Wiki summary of how No Confidence votes work. We’d need a more specific proposal to make minor structural alignments as to not interfere with operation of the Constitution in general, but it could be made to work.
“Typically, when parliament votes non-confidence, or where it fails to vote confidence, a government must respond in one of two ways:
* resign
* seek a parliamentary dissolution and request a general election
This procedure is either formalised through constitutional convention, as is the case in Westminster style parliaments such as the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia, or explicitly stated in a written constitution, as is the case with Germany and Spain.
Where a government has lost the confidence of the responsible house (i.e., the directly elected lower chamber which can select and dismiss it; in some states both houses of parliament are responsible), a head of state may have the constitutional right to refuse a request for a parliamentary dissolution, so forcing an immediate resignation.
Often, important bills serve as motions of confidence, when so declared by the government. This may be used to prevent dissident members of parliament from voting against it. Sometimes a government may lose a vote because the opposition ends debate prematurely when too many government members are away.
In the Westminster system, the defeat of a supply bill (one that concerns the spending of money) automatically requires (by convention) the resignation of the government or dissolution of Parliament, much like a non-confidence vote, since a government that cannot spend money is hamstrung. This is called loss of supply.
Where the Upper House of a Westminster system country has the right to refuse supply, such as in Australia during the events of 1975, the convention becomes a grey area as Westminster governments are not normally expected to maintain the confidence of the Upper House.”
Buddha,
I share Mike A’s confusion. How would the recall/no-confidence would work and why do you think it is necessary?
Buddha, I’d sign on to that platform right now (although I don’t really understand how #9 works).
Buddha,
Studying in between care-giving times with my 2 year old grandchild … will have more time tonight
This shaping up to be a blog convention … modern times!
Slarti,
This is why I am soliciting early input.
As to Afghanistan, I said nothing about timing. Personally I think the time for a quick withdrawal passed within the first few months of the “war”. We should have left right after we destroyed every terrorist training camp and simply left them alone with this message: “Do it again? We’ll either turn you to glass or fill your skies with drones 24/7 until the end of time.” But then again, we should have attacked Saudi Arabia in conjunction with attacking Afghanistan instead of invading Iraq.
On the No Confidence vote/Recall election schema, look into the Parliamentary system and you’ll get an idea of what I’m talking about. If we’d had this Constitutional mechanism, Bush wouldn’t have made it 8 years before getting the boot.
Buddha,
I mostly agree, but I’d need to see specifics before I could get behind #9 and I think that an immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan is probably a bad idea (after having made so many mistakes, it’s hard to see what the right way forward is, though). I’ll give you a more thorough critique later, I just wanted to subscribe to this thread.
Blouise, CCD and anyone else that wants to play along,
I’m still working on a principle’s draft, but here is a condensed list of platform planks with a few sub-groupings. If you have suggestions, I’d be glad to hear them. As always, if you don’t have my direct e-mail, I can be contacted at buddha.is.laughing.ril@gmail.com. Keep in mind this is a condensed list as to sub-groupings but all of the primary planks.
____
CPP Platform (draft)
1 – Restore the Rule of Law (Repeal of Patriot Act, Constraint of the Executive in line with the Separation of Powers Doctrine, closure of black ops prisons, prosecution of the Bush/Cheney Administration, restoration of habeas corpus).
2 – End Corporate Participation In Governance By Lobby Reform (Constitutional Amendment nullifying the Citizens United ruling, Ending the Lobby/Congress Revolving Door, the end of “Too Big to Fail” for any industry)
3 – Universal Health Care (Single Payer Not For Profit National Health Care Trust, limitations on service providers, tort and medical malpractice insurance reform, stronger patient rights)
4 – Rebuilding Critical Infrastructure (Power, Transportation, Education, Food and Water Safety, Telecommunications reform)
5 – Rebuilding the Economic Base – (Promotion of manufacturing, skilled trades, basic sciences, green power and manufacturing processes, wage reform and reformation of governmental contracting practices with punishment for off-shoring and the use of illegal immigrant workers)
6 – Immigration Reform (streamlining immigration processes, strict deportation rules, stronger Federal Border Patrol Services)
7 – Banking and Tax Reform (Closing corporate tax loopholes, elimination of the civilian tax code and implementation of a sliding scale flat-tax without exemptions, separation of consumer and commercial banking and limitations on fees)
8 – Open Ballot Initiative (standardizing voting practices with mandatory paper trails for audits, open primaries, make it easier for alternate parties to register and get parties on ballots, mandated air time for all candidates on a given ballot, party sponsorship reform)
9 – Constitutional Amendment for Recall Elections and Votes of No Confidence
10 – Withdrawal from Afghanistan/Reprioritization and Redeployment of Military Resources
_____
I welcome and await your input.
the good thing about owing all that money to China is that they will bring good high paying wages to Americans [hopefully] when they exploit our mineral reserves and natural resources that environmentalists wouldn’t let us harness as payment for the money we owe them.
AY–
I assume you mean the banks in China.
Whats good for the country is more deficit, more and more. The banks will then own the country lock stock and barrel for a bargain basement price.
😀
Buddha–
But green’s the color of Spring
And green can be cool and friendly-like
And green can be big like an ocean, or important
Like a mountain, or tall like a tree
When green is all there is to be
It could make you wonder why, but why wonder why
Wonder, I am green and it’ll do fine, it’s beautiful
And I think it’s what I want to be
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/right-wing-rallies-around-tea-party-after-naacp-condemns-movement-for-harboring-racists.php The tea party not racist?