WHO’S BEING IGNORED AS STATE MULLS SLAVERY REPARATIONS

 

CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: FRIDAY, APRIL 21, 2023, OR THEREAFTER

BY THOMAS D. ELIAS

        “WHO’S BEING IGNORED AS STATE MULLS SLAVERY REPARATIONS”

 

        The amounts of money now bandied about as some Californians debate whether the state should pay reparations to descendants of slaves with African forbears dwarf anything this state or any of its localities has ever considered.

 

        The state-appointed Reparations Task Force, yet to take a formal position on this, was urged by many Black activists to recommend giving $360,000 each to about 1.8 million Black Californians whose ancestors were enslaved, even though there was no legal African-derived slavery in California after statehood began in 1850.

 

        Some task force members resist such huge cash payouts, preferring other forms of reparations in fields like education and employment, especially since the state faces a deficit of more than $20 billion as its budget-approval deadlines approach.

 

        Almost simultaneously, San Francisco supervisors unanimously expressed support for a draft plan by a city-appointed committee calling for $5 million cash payments to all local descendants of slaves, plus guaranteed annual stipends of $97,000 for 250 years. No one has any idea how the cash-strapped city, down a reported 100,000-plus residents since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, could pay for all this.

 

        But the proposed largesse for persons with enslaved ancestors may be misdirected, suggests an about-to-be-published, eye-opening book by a University of Delaware historian, who says that while California had no legal Black slaves after statehood, it condoned plenty of other slavery.

 

        The coming book, California: A Slave State,” by Jean Pfaelzer (Yale University Press, probable price $35), claims that while California never had many African-descended slaves, it has had many others, including an unknown number of human-trafficked women held as sex slaves today.

 

        Writes Pfaelzer, “The story of California is a history of 250 years of uninterrupted human bondage. California thrived because it welcomed, honed and legalized ways for humans to own humans…”

 

        Pfaelzer writes that at the same time slave ships crisscrossed the Atlantic Ocean, bringing human chattel to the future United States and many Caribbean islands, Spanish priests who established the historic string of missions along the California coast were enslaving nearby Native Americans.

 

        “Under four empires – Spain, Russia, Mexico and finally the United States,” she says, “(California) grew as a slave state.”

 

        She begins with the history of U.S. Army depredations against indigenous tribes, especially in Northern California, where troops made weekly forays to Indian settlements throughout the 1850s, driving their residents at gunpoint to strongpoints like Ft. Seward, near the present-day Humboldt Redwoods State Park in Humboldt County, where adult males were slaughtered and their bodies burned, while women and children were sold off or indentured.

 

        She relates that almost any California Indian could be captured and enslaved unless they could prove they were gainfully employed – and very few could. She adds that many families were deliberately separated, a practice also inflicted on African-descended slaves in the old South.

 

        Pfaelzer also describes how Chinese laborers brought to California by 19^th Century railroad barons were enslaved in a variety of ways.

 

        She describes Chinese women caged and violated for decades in San Francisco brothels, and Southern whites bringing Black slaves to California during the Gold Rush.

 

        Her book should raise new questions for reparations commissions, state and local. Perhaps the commissions should not focus solely on or be composed almost exclusively of Blacks and perhaps they ought to consider the diverse forms of slavery practiced here, rather than concentrating exclusively on the plantation-centered slavery of the old South.

 

        There’s also the question of whether the virtual decimation of Native American tribes by things like warfare and smallpox left so few alive that the take from casinos run by those who have survived obviates the need for any reparations.

 

        But this would leave out enslaved Chinese, modern trafficked humans from eastern Europe and Asia and others who contributed unwillingly to California’s rise to its current status among the world’s top five economies.

 

        All of which means slavery reparations commissions operating today are incomplete in their very composition, which will inevitably make any plans they offer one-sided and favoring descendants of one type of slavery over others that were comparably cruel and debilitating.

 

        That ought to cause everyone involved to take a deep breath before adopting expensive but unfair and incomplete plans.

 

    -30-

    Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net.

CENSUS COULD HELP STATE IN SLOW-GROWTH ERA

CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, APRIL 21, 2020, OR THEREAFTER


BY THOMAS D. ELIAS

   “CENSUS COULD HELP STATE IN SLOW-GROWTH ERA”

          There is no doubt this is a slow-growth era for California, historically the center of fast American population expansion. In excess of 200,000 more individuals moved from California to other states over the last 10 years than arrived here legally from elsewhere in this country.

Growth will be even slower in the immediate wake of the coronavirus crisis, which has also brought this state’s economy to a virtual standstill.

          Meanwhile, live births and undocumented immigration more than made up for the migration deficit, with California actually gaining about 1.3 million residents over the last decade and now very close to a populace of 40 million.

          That’s the smallest growth rate for California since officials started keeping figures around 1950. It could cost the state one of its 53 seats in the House of Representatives if the U.S. Census verifies these figures via its supposedly comprehensive survey this spring and summer.

          The Census measure of population occurs every 10 years; it actually began in February in a remote Inuit village in Alaska. The count moved to the continental United States in March, but anti-coronavirus tactics brought it to a virtual standstill, with door-to-door canvassers furloughed.

          There were indications Californians thought more about politics than usual around the time of the March 3 primary election. Had that been sustained, it promised to help the state, especially if Californians took seriously the possibility of losing not just one, but two congressional seats should the count come in below expectations. The virus quickly broke any such trains of thought.

          But it’s not only representation in the Capitol at stake in this canvass. The size of federal grants for highways, sewers, health care, welfare, fire and police protection and even fishery maintenance, among many other things, hinges on Census population findings.

          No one ever seriously questioned the integrity of Census counts until this year, when President Trump and his appointees tried to insert a citizenship question into the Census questionnaire in a plain attempt to scare off undocumented immigrants fearful their information would not be kept confidential, as the law requires.

          The U.S. Supreme Court actually concluded fear arousal was the Trump motive for pushing the citizenship question, and the high court nixed it.

          When things get going in earnest, this should help Census takers motivate illegal immigrants to get counted, vital because the Constitution mandates a complete tally of every human being in the nation, not just citizens.

          California’s officials will have no direct role in the tally, but long before the federal government began hiring more than 25,000 temporary workers to do its job here, the state earmarked over $180 million to encourage all Californians to get counted. Much of the money went to Latino community organizations promising to get word to their clients and members that it’s OK – even good for them – to participate.

          That would certainly be good for California, home to about one-third of all undocumented immigrants now living in this country.

          But other states – most notably the No. 2 and No. 3 population states of Texas and Florida – are making no similar effort. That non-effort includes 24 states, virtually all controlled by Republican governors and GOP-dominated legislatures.

          Republicans in Texas, Florida and some others don’t want their counts maximized by encouraging the undocumented to participate. They fear a complete count could set up new congressional districts in heavily-Latino areas that might turn their legislatures and congressional delegations Democratic.

          This contrast in how states are treating the Census count has great potential for California. The fewer persons counted in other places, the more representation and federal funding comes here.

          The contrast in how states are handling the Census reveals strong fears held by the current leaders of many states over their new and undocumented residents. One Latino member of the Texas Legislature opined that his state’s voting not to spend anything for promoting the Census shows that Republicans in charge there “are concerned if you have a more accurate count, it would put them at a disadvantage.”

          That’s likely correct, and now only time and the count will tell how much the GOP’s fears might help California.

         

-30-

    Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough, The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net

TEACHER QUALIFICATIONS, NOT EVALUATIONS, MAY BE EDUCATION ANSWER

CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE:  FRIDAY, APRIL 21, 2017, OR THEREAFTER


BY THOMAS D. ELIAS

    "TEACHER QUALIFICATIONS, NOT EVALUATIONS, MAY BE EDUCATION ANSWER"

          Few questions about public education have been disputed more hotly over the last few years than evaluations – in a day when almost everyone agrees public schools need major improvement, how to tell which teachers are good, which are the best and which don’t deserve to be kept around.

          For some, the answer is in “value added” ratings: How much do children improve or decline in standardized testing while under the tutelage of one teacher compared to what they do under another?

          But America’s second-largest teachers union might have a better idea: make sure teachers are well qualified even before they’re hired. True, that’s what teacher credentialing is supposed to do, but no one pretends any more that a credential assures any teacher has mastery over the subjects he or she might teach.

          As a rule, teachers and their unions don’t like the value-added idea. It  puts all the onus on them and none on pupils or their parents, where many analysts believe most education problems originate and are perpetuated.

          But a few local unions have broken down and allowed test scores to be used as part of teacher evaluation. In 2015, California’s largest school district (Los Angeles Unified) and its teachers union tentatively agreed to this sort of arrangement. That agreement eventually could see state test scores, high school exit exam results, rates of attendance, graduation and suspensions all factored into teacher evaluations. The weight given to each of these factors and classroom observation is not yet agreed upon.

          Into this dispute comes the American Federation of Teachers, the No. 2 education union behind the National Education Assn. (The California Teachers Assn. is part of the NEA.)

          The AFT notes that school districts for a time raised the bar for students by using the high school exit exam and other standardized tests to make sure diplomas have real meaning. On hiatus now in California, that exam may or may not come back. But the union notes there are no similarly widespread means to test whether new teachers are qualified to take over classrooms.

          It commissioned a survey of 500 new public school teachers and found fully one-third felt unprepared on their first day. Those hired to teach special needs students or working in low-performing schools were most likely to feel unprepared and overwhelmed.

          The union suggests improving this via a national entry assessment “that is universal across the county, rigorous and multidimensional.” AFT president Randi Weingarten compared it to the bar exam taken by nascent lawyers.

          “The components must include subject and pedagogical (teaching techniques) knowledge and demonstration of teaching performance – in other words, the ingredients of a caring, competent and confident new teacher,” said an AFT report.

          In response, the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, which evaluates what teachers should know, agreed to start designing entry assessment standards for the profession, which would include a full year of successful student teaching under a classroom veteran.

          By doing all this, the AFT is not out to put more pressure on young teachers. Rather, the idea is that when school districts, parents, politicians and the public know everyone at the head of a classroom is qualified, pressure will mount on parents and students to do their share, because it will no longer be so easy to accuse teachers of incompetence.

          The AFT also wants new standards for teachers to help de-emphasize what it calls “a national fixation on excessive testing,” which often sees instructors teaching to specific tests, rather than striving for a rounded education for pupils. That’s natural when teachers are evaluated on test scores more than anything else.

          “Public education should be obsessed with high-quality teaching and learning, not high-stakes testing,” Weingarten said. “Tests have a role, but the fixation with them undermines (giving) kids a universal education and keeps us from fairly measuring teachers’ performance.”

          In short, give kids the best-prepared teachers possible, rather than loosing unprepared newbies into classrooms with insufficient guidance or preparation.

          Then it would be up to parents and students themselves, as they’d no longer be able to scapegoat teachers when kids do poorly.

          If this seems to represent a pendulum swing away from today’s overemphasis on tests, that’s probably a good thing, so long as standardized exams aren’t completely abandoned.

         

    -30-       
     Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, go to www.californiafocus.net

SMELL OF FEAR AS UTILITIES COMMISSION LAWYERS UP

CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, APRIL 21, 2015 OR THEREAFTER

BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
          “SMELL OF FEAR AS UTILITIES COMMISSION LAWYERS UP”

          The strong odor surrounding California’s most powerful regulatory commission this spring stems not only from corrupt-seeming decisions but also from fear. Fear that past and present members or top staffers of the state Public Utilities Commission might do jail time. Fear they could see personal fortunes decimated by legal fees while fending off state and federal criminal investigations.

          How bad have things become at the PUC, which sets prices for privately-owned utilities like Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric?

          Even the commission’s new president, Michael Picker, said the other day that when it comes to cleaning up his agency, “I think we have a long way to go.” Of course, over the last 17 months, he backed every questionable decision pushed by disgraced former PUC President Michael Peevey.

          Like many outfits overcome by fear, the PUC has lately tried to cover up by claiming internal documents are “privileged” and by hiring top defense attorneys. The commission’s first contract with the SheppardMullin law firm was for $49,000, work to be done at a “discount” rate of $882 per hour. That deal fell just below the $50,000 level where state contracts for outside work must be approved by the Department of General Services.

          But the Picker-led PUC has followed up by awarding SheppardMullin a contract for $5.2 million for the rest of this year. Both agreements may be illegal, even if the new one is approved by the DGS.

    Still, there is little doubt of that approval. All present PUC members were appointed by Gov. Jerry Brown, who also named all top officials of the DGS, so this is really the right hand approving what the left hand wants. What’s more, Brown’s chief of staff, Nancy McFadden, was PG&E’s chief lobbyist in Sacramento before joining him.

          Asked under what authority it hired SheppardMullin, the PUC cited state government code section 995.8. That section says a public entity can only hire criminal lawyers to defend present or former officials if “The public entity determines that such defense would be in the best interests of the public entity…” The PUC would have to hold hearings to make such a circular determination, but it has not.

          This makes the big-buck pacts appear illegal, no matter what the DGS might rule.

          The obvious question here is why state taxpayers should fund the defense of officials who may have conspired with big utilities to bilk them via decisions like the one forcing consumers to pay most costs for retiring the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.

          Commission spokeswoman Terrie Prosper claims outside lawyers are needed because the PUC “does not have the expertise…or time to handle…the massive amount of work that needs to be done to…manage and cooperate with investigations.”

          The SheppardMullin contract suggests that “managing investigations” includes stonewalling requests for documents while “assisting in public relations.” It says attorneys will also “develop and manage litigation strategies” and “assist and attend interviews of commission employees by investigators (including preparing witnesses).”

          “This means the $5.2 million is for a cover-up,” says former San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguirre, who has sued to block the contracts. “They will restrain and restrict documents and the testimony of witnesses and use privilege to (try to) conceal crimes.”

          Aguirre notes the commission never formally voted to spend the money, but PUC Executive Director Timothy Sullivan simply signed the new contract. Because the PUC itself cannot be indicted, it’s clear the money will be spent to help defend individuals – present or former commission officials.

    Neither Sullivan nor any other PUC official responds to repeated inquiries about who SheppardMullin will defend. Nor would the PUC say why those officials should not fund their own defenses.

          Aguirre suggests that if Picker really favors transparency, as he often claims, he would waive all privilege and open every commission document to press, public and investigators, saving the $5.2 million in legal fees.

          But Picker repeatedly refuses to be interviewed and by the end of March, the commission had spent more than $2 million on outside lawyers to deny document requests during the last six months, all without a hearing.

          So the smell of fear is plain at the PUC, and no one can predict the next major errors and cover-up attempts that might produce.

    -30-       
    Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net