IMMIGRATION

Most of our ancestors came to the United States because they were poor and starving or because they were being killed for their beliefs.

Usually, first generation immigrants are sympathetic to other immigrants. By the second or third generation, the children and grandchildren of immigrants are US citizens through and through. This is a good thing except when the US citizen decides that now that (s)he is here, the country is too full for anyone else.

This country has a history of appalling prejudice against large groups of immigrants. We did not allow the Chinese to buy property, we made insulting jokes against the Irish and the Poles, we interred Japanese Americans during World Was II. Waves after wave of immigrants were met with poverty and prejudice when they came to the US.

Now we are again being hostile to immigrants from Mexico and South America. We call them names, and want them rounded up and sent home.

Whenever illegal immigration happens overseas, we are all sympathy. We call the people refuges, and demand that they be treated with dignity.

Illegal immigration is less likely to happen if the illegal immigrants are not better off the moment they step foot in the US. Unfortunately, our corporations are addicted to cheap labor. They hire the illegals through subcontractors to avoid legal penalties.

Illegal immigration is a crime. It is also a crime to steal food even if you are starving.

Honestly, if we want people to stay in Mexico, we need to help Mexico become a country where people have an opportunity to make a living wage. There is NO WAY we can protect our border from being crossed by people so desperate that they will risk death in order to come here.

We CANNOT come to a sensible solution until we stop calling people names and until we stop looking for the easy one sentence answer.

This is a very complex question. We need to THINK about the solution.

Unless you are 100% Native American, your ancestors immigrated to the US, so have a little sympathy for the newest strangers among us.

DECISIONS MADE OUT OF FEAR AND ANGER are ALWAYS bad decisions. Please stop spreading fear and anger so that we can come to a solution that makes us proud to be Americans.

EMPTY HOUSES -- WHAT TO DO

All over the US, people have abandoned their homes due to financial issues.

Some of these homes will be sold to investors who will wait for better prices before reselling them to homeowners.

Couldn't some non-profit buy these houses at the current bargain prices? The non-profit could sell the homes to nurses, teachers, police officers and firepersons. Then these people who provide priceless services to our communities, could actually afford to live in the communities where they work.

Actually, with a little bit of legal maneuvering, we could use redevelopment funds to get the houses to the service people. No one is going to want to invest in municipal redevelopment until the economy has improved. So we could use the funds that are just sitting there to implement the Home for Our Service Persons (HOSP).

The biggest risk in buying a bank owned or repossessed home is the damage that may have been done to the home while it was unoccupied. If the non-profit or municipal redevelopment inspect the homes and fix the defects, then sell the homes to teachers, nurses, firepersons and police officers, we will have a win-win-win situation.

Instead of empty homes, we will have homes full of the best sort of people.

ILLNESS AND VACATION

I am recovering from pneumonia, and am taking a few days to go to BayCon 2010.

Meanwhile, you can call your congressperson about "Don't ask, don't tell." As usual, if you can substitute the word gay for the word black, and people are repeating what they said about blacks 50 years ago, then it is prejudice, not reality.

An example, "It will ruin the army if blacks are allowed to serve alongside whites." This statement was untrue. Likewise the statement, "It will ruin the army if gays are allowed to openly serve alongside straights," is also an untrue statement.

This country was founded on the premise that all persons have equal rights. If a gay or lesbian wants to risk his/her life defending me, I am grateful, as I can no longer defend myself.

I will be back in June.

VOTING FOR JUDGES

Too many people vote for the judge who is currently a District Attorney, or a Deputy District Attorney. As you know District Attorneys are the attorneys who go to court to try to get a criminal conviction against an accused person. Sometimes they are called County Attorneys or States Attorneys.

Unfortunately, District Attorneys know only one side of criminal law. They usually know nothing about civil or family law. As District Attorneys, they sometimes get tunnel vision about how the law should work. Too many judges who used to be District Attorneys become rubber stamps for their former co-workers. These judges become so tough on crime that their court convicts the innocent.

I always vote for the person who is a defense attorney, or a civil attorney, or a family law attorney. I believe that this makes for a more well rounded judicial system, where the judges know the law and apply it wisely.

SANTA CLARA COUNTY DA

While District Attorney Delores Carr was a judge, I had two matters in her court, both of which required multiple court appearances. Both in my matters, and other matters I heard while waiting, Carr was knowledgeable in the law, and wise in her decisions. I voted for her before, and will vote for her again.

I do not know anything bad about the other candidate, Jeff Rosen. However, Jeff Rosen is supported by former DA Kennedy. In my opinion, it is Kennedy who started the "win at all costs" culture st the DA's office.

As we all know, it can be difficult to change the culture of an organization. It is especially difficult to change the culture in an organization full of trial attorneys. Trial attorneys are intelligent, argumentative, arrogant, cynical, persuasive, competitive, and love to win. Some are perfectly willing to be so tough on crime that they convict the innocent. Luckily, most are also ethical and want to see justice done.

CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS

When Meg Whitman was CEO of eBay she was given what I call stock "bribes" from Goldman Sachs. I think the IPO stocks she received were a bribe. Believe me, no one gives a CEO a sure chance to make $1.8 million without expecting something in return. Just because something was not yet illegal, does not make it ethical. No wonder she will not release her tax returns.

During Carly Fiona's time as HP CEO there was an extremely troubling incident where HP illegally accessed the personal phone records of all of the members of its Board of Directors. It is a little to Nixonian for me.

PROP 13 -- This proposition encourages earthquake retrofitting of old buildings.

PROP 14 -- Changes primary election so the top two candidates go on to the general election. BAD IDEA to do this statewide. Perhaps an experiment on this could be done, having one house of the state legislature elected in this fashion for two elections, then see the effect. VOTE NO ON THIS ONE. Let them rewrite it to limit its effect so we can evaluate whether or not it will work on a small scale before we go statewide with an experiment that MAY MAKE THINGS WORSE.

PROP 15 -- GOOD IDEA, limited in scope. Well worth trying.

PROP 16 --NO ON THIS ONE. EVERY TIME, we vote to increase the number of votes needed to vote something into law, we create a long term BAD SITUATION. You may not realize that your favorite tax law, the old Prop 13, has made residential property owners pay a MUCH larger portion of the overall property taxes. IN OTHER WORDS, rich corporations pay a smaller percentage of property tax than the poor citizens who bought an overpriced home.

PROP 17 -- A change in the insurance law, wanted by insurance companies. I ALWAYS vote NO if an insurance company says something is good for me. They do not seem to have MY best interests in mind when they propose laws.

DUE PROCESS OF LAW

Lawyers and newspapers are always going on about due process of law. That this or that action violates due process.

SO WHAT IS DUE PROCESS?

First and foremost, due process requires that anybody who asks a court to rule in his favor must describe what he wants, why he wants it, and NOTIFY the other side that there is a matter in front of the court. The person sued gets a chance to answer and to have a court hearing, often with a jury trial, to decide the matter.

In civil matters, the two sides have to exchange information relevant to the case. In criminal matters, the government has to provide all information that they have regarding the case to the arrested person.

A person cannot be arrested by law enforcement unless the law officer states why the person is arrested, and lists the charges. The arrested person does not have to tell the police anything. The arrested person gets a fair trial, by jury, and an attorney to defend him. Sometimes a court will let a person out of jail on a habeas corpus petition because of a violation of due process.

A violation of due process is also a fancy way to say, "This is unfair. It is so unfair that justice will not be done."

The above description cannot possibly cover all of the aspect of due process. Volumes of court decisions and legal treatises have been written about due process.

DUE PROCESS of law is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. The term, in Latin, of course, goes back to the 1200's as part of the English Magna Carta.