Authored by Susan Crabtree via RealClearPolitics,

The mayors of California's three biggest cities have rankled some progressive activists in recent months by joining a wave of fellow Democrats renouncing once popular initiatives to defund the police, reduce sentencing, and undertake other criminal justice reforms amid deep concerns over public safety. 

Facing a public backlash over rampant thefts and an epidemic of fentanyl deaths related to drug trafficking, San Francisco Mayor London Breed and San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria in recent months have joined the GOP fight to dismantle Proposition 47. That law, approved by voters in 2014, recategorized thefts below $950 from felonies to misdemeanors, and many critics blame it for the spate of smash-and-grab robberies at department and convenience stores across California. 

“We should be locking up criminals, not laundry detergent,” Gloria, who refers to himself as a progressive Democrat, declared in his state-of-the-city address in January. 

Meanwhile, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has called for adding hundreds of police officers to the city’s rolls and boosting their pay. 

But Democratic incumbents and candidates in several of the most competitive U.S. House of Representatives races across California – the outcome of which will play a critical role in determining control of the chamber in the next Congress – are either swimming against the tough-on-crime tide or trying to avoid alienating a key ally. 

These Democrats have been touting their close ties to a progressive lobbying powerhouse that helped usher in some of the most controversial changes to criminal justice laws across the state in recent years. 

Equality California began as a Sacramento-based LGBTQ+ advocacy group 20 years ago but has since become a major player on several issues, including its self-proclaimed priority of transforming the Golden State’s criminal justice system. The influential organization, which rakes in millions from Hollywood celebrities and business interests and received a state grant windfall last year, has been instrumental in promoting a reform agenda that many prominent California Democrats are now trying to reverse. 

The group campaigned aggressively to eliminate cash bail for many types of crimes, legalize prostitution, shorten probation periods for misdemeanors and some felonies, and end qualified immunity for police, making it easier for victims of alleged excessive force and other police misconduct to sue officers. The push to lift legal protections for police failed on the federal level but largely succeeded in California when Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a Senate bill into law in the fall of 2021. 

In 2022, the group’s PAC also contributed $5,000 to embattled Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon, the original author of Proposition 47. Gascon survived a close recall effort in 2022, just two months after San Francisco voters ousted District Attorney Chesa Boudin in a blow to the national movement toward more lenient prosecution given the city’s status as one of the nation’s most liberal enclaves. 

In the middle of the riots after the police-custody death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Equality California was one of several organizations that called for donations to groups on the “frontlines” of the protests, including the Minnesota Freedom Fund. That fund eventually received $35 million in donations during the tumultuous summer of 2020 and used the money to bail out dozens of defendants, including those accused of murder, violent felonies, and sex crimes. 

Like Equality California, the Minnesota Freedom Fund aggressively pushed for defunding the police and ending cash bail for all individuals accused of crimes. 

Under the “issues” section on its website, Equality California lists “criminal justice reform” first among all the issues it works on, including education, faith and religion, gun safety, hate crimes and safety, health care and HIV issues. 

“LGBTQ+ people face disproportionate rates of arrest, conviction, incarceration, and recidivism compared to their non-LGBTQ+ peers,” the website asserts in explaining why the group prioritizes reducing criminal penalties and is pushing for more leniency in other aspects of criminal justice law. 

Seven Democrats in the most competitive House races have touted their Equality California endorsements on social media. They include Adam Gray, Josh Harder, Joe Kerr, David Min, Will Rollins, Rudy Salas, and George Whitesides.

Whitesides (pictured at top), a former aerospace executive challenging GOP Rep. Mike Garcia in a key House battleground north of Los Angeles, has the closest ties to Equality California. He and his wife donated an undisclosed amount to the group in both 2020 and 2021. 

Those donations qualified the Whitesides as Equality California’s “regional influencers” for 2020 and 2021. It’s a title the couple shared with the hedge-fund billionaire Tom Steyer, record executive David Geffen’s foundation, California Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis and her husband, as well as Rep. Sara Jacobs (the granddaughter of Qualcomm founder Irwin Jacobs), and Tom Sandoval, a cast member of the TV reality series “Vanderpump Rules.” (The 2020 and 2021 annual reports do not list an amount associated with the “regional influencers” tier, but the group’s 2019 annual reports notes that a such a designation is earned for contributions of $10,000 to $19,999.)

Whitesides’ campaign did not respond to a request for comment about whether he backs Equality California’s criminal justice priorities. 

In February, Will Rollins, a former federal prosecutor challenging veteran GOP Rep. Ken Calvert in a district stretching from Riverside to Palm Springs, touted his Equality California endorsement on X.com, along with a photo of himself dining with the group’s board of directors. 

“It was great joining @eqca board members of their board of directors lunch,” Rollins tweeted. “I am proud to be endorsed by Equality California in my race for Congress. When I get to D.C., I am going to fight to advance LGBTQ+ rights for all Americans. Together, we will win.” 

The Calvert-Rollins race is a closely fought rematch, with crime taking center stage. Rollins has touted his role as a prosecutor and has criticized Calvert for voting in favor of the First Step Act, President Trump’s signature justice reform package, which released more than 2,200 federal inmates in 2019. The bill was passed with broad bipartisan support in Congress before the pandemic-era crime spikes while the criminal justice reform agenda was gaining Republican and Democratic support. Media outlets have since reported that it released more than 100 violent criminals and sex offenders. 

In a local newspaper op-ed, Calvert tried to lump Rollins into the same camp as Gascon and Boudin, calling him “the worst kind of liberal prosecutor” who “routinely cuts soft plea deals with perps and wants to reduce sentences for criminals wreaking havoc on our streets.” Last month, Calvert’s campaign also cut a television ad calling Rollins “extreme” and noting that he “even supports reducing sentences for violent criminals including drug traffickers while California fentanyl deaths skyrocket.” 

Rollins has denied the accusations about supporting cash bail and lighter sentences for violent criminals and drug traffickers, asserting that he had a 99% conviction rate and helped put “murders, terrorists, MS-13 and Sinaloa cartel members in prison.” He was less forthright about cash bail, noting that defendants that pose a danger to society or are a flight risk should be detained before trial, but Rollins didn’t indicate whether he supports ending cash bail in other circumstances. 

The results of the Calvert-Rollins face-off in 2022 were so close that the Democratic hopeful was attending a new member orientation in Washington when new alerts came across his phone that he had lost to Calvert, the dean of the California delegation. 

David Min, a Democratic state senator running against GOP attorney and former state legislator Scott Baugh in a tight race for the Orange County seat vacated by Rep. Katie Porter, was the only Democrat to respond to RCP’s inquiry about the Equality California’s endorsement, and whether he backs the group’s criminal justice agenda.  

Concerns about public safety have been making headlines in the country in recent weeks as the traditionally more conservative area strives to discourage criminal elements from nearby Los Angeles from becoming active there. Last month, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office announced a novel public safety campaign aimed at deterring thieves with a message plastered on billboards and bus ads: “Crime doesn’t pay in Orange County.” 

“If you steal, we prosecute,” the signs sternly warn. 

Min, who was arrested last year for drunk driving in a taxpayer-funded car, still managed to outmaneuver fellow Democrat Joanna Weiss in the primary and secure the endorsement of Porter and the California Democratic Party. 

Min campaign spokesman Orrin Evans forwarded the lawmaker’s endorsements from the state’s largest police union, the Peace Officers Research Association of California, or PORAC, and the California Fraternal Order of Police. Evans also touted Min’s record of supporting police budget priorities, including successful requests he made for $2 million for a “real-time crime center” to help police track crime quickly and $1 million for new electric police cruisers. 

“Sen. Min has always ensured that law enforcement and first responders have the tools they need to keep Southern California’s families safe and secure,” Roger Hilton, president of the state Fraternal Order of Police, said in a statement along with the endorsement. 

In contrast, Baugh has the backing of Orange County Sheriff Don Barnes and several House Republican leaders. In an interview with RCP, the former GOP leader of the state assembly cited a strong tough-on-crime record dating back to the 1990s. Barnes and local District Attorney Todd Spitzer also voted for Baugh to become the chairman of a local gang reduction and intervention program. 

Baugh, who previously served as county GOP chairman, countered that Min has supported some of the same sweeping criminal justice reforms as Equality California during his time in Sacramento. Min voted in favor of a 2021 bill eliminating cash bail and another measure in 2022 to automatically seal many felons’ criminal records, including domestic violence convictions. 

“Min’s hiding behind the PORAC labor endorsement to run from his progressive policies, including support for no-cash bail,” Baugh said in the interview. “This is the type of cowardly behavior we don’t need in Congress.” 

Equality California also keeps track of state and federal lawmakers’ legislative records on key priorities and issues an annual scorecard. In 2022, the score included votes on several bills, including the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, which, if passed, would have eliminated qualified immunity for police. According to the Congressional Budget Office, it also would have cost local departments hundreds of millions of dollars in training and equipment just when several major cities across the country had slashed funding for police. 

While Congress was considering the measure, the Fraternal Order of Police argued that ending qualified immunity was “anti-police” and would drastically reduce the number of candidates choosing to become police officers. 

Over the past several years, police departments across the country, including in San Francisco and Los Angeles, have faced severe staffing shortages as they struggle to recruit and retain officers. At the height of the defund the police movement, California lost 2,100 police officers (with full arrest powers) and roughly 1,100 civilian staff, diminishing the number of patrol officers to 1991 levels. 

In 2021 Equality California scored votes on a handful of bills, including the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act and a measure that would have allowed adults who entered the U.S. as undocumented children to become lawful permanent residents and citizens. That year (and in 2022), Reps. Mike Levin, who is facing a rematch from GOP challenger Matt Gunderson, and Harder, who is in a tight contest against Stockton Mayor Kevin Lincoln, earned 100% ratings from Equality California. 

As state legislators, Gray, Min, and Salas received a 100% rating on the group’s 2022 scorecard, with Min maintaining his perfect rating from 2021. 

With so many leading California Democrats backtracking on criminal justice reforms, Republicans plan to hammer their opponents who remain undecided about repealing Proposition 47 and other more lenient laws as soft on crime and weak on the border. Despite polls showing voters deeply concerned about illegal immigration and President Biden’s open border policies, California Democrats have continued to support broad amnesty for illegal immigrants and the state’s controversial sanctuary state law, both of which Equality California strongly backs. 

In the state, border issues may divide some heavily Latino districts, but Republicans have a greater chance for traction when it comes to crime. Americans’ worries about what they describe as the nation’s crime problems are at a recent high, with 63% characterizing public safety concerns as either extremely or very serious in a November Gallup survey. That’s up from 54% when Gallup last polled voters on the issue and the highest level the polling company has recorded in recent years. The prior high of 60% was recorded in the initial 2000 polling, as well as in 2010 and 2016. 

It's hard to predict whether support for specific criminal justice reforms, such as eliminating cash bail, will hold sway with voters. But with Breed, who is in a tough reelection fight for mayor, and other Democrats pivoting away from the reform movement, it will be easier to focus voters on the issue. 

While there is little comprehensive research about the impact of eliminating cash bail on crime, a study by the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office in Northern California early last year found that individuals released on cash-free or low-cost bail were much more likely to re-offend than those who pasted bail. They were also far more likely to commit new violent offenses. 

The study used a random sample of 100 people arrested during the county’s zero-bail policy, which was in effect from April 2020 through May 2021. It compared those results to 100 people who were arrested and posted bail in 2018 and 2019. The study found that people released were arrested for new crimes at an average rate 70% higher than those who posted bail, committed felonies 90% more often, and committed misdemeanors 123% more often. 

Susan Crabtree is RealClearPolitics' national political correspondent.

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

We’ve all come across warnings against doom scrolling.

This is the practice of waking up in the morning, scouring headlines, seizing on the bad news, and dwelling on the darkness. You do this during downtimes in the day and in the evening. Your mood worsens, permanently.

It cannot be good for the human spirit.

The term implies that we are somehow looking for doom because it gives us a dopamine rush or something. Testing this idea, I’ve variously tried to avoid doing that. But there is a problem. It is impossible to avoid simply because the bad news is so ubiquitous. In fact, I’ve come to distrust any venues that are not reporting it!

Many people have concluded that if we are looking for something other than doom, we should leave what we called “the news” entirely and focus on culture, religion, philosophy, history, art, poetry, or find something practical and productive to do.

I recently met a wonderful Mennonite family living in Amish country in Pennsylvania. They live a completely unplugged life: no cell phones, no internet, no TV. There are only books, community worship, farming, tending to livestock, shopping at local stores, and visiting with neighbors.

I never could have imagined that there would come a time when I would say to those who have completely seceded from modern life: you might be doing it the right way. There is something truly brilliant about the choices you have made.

Sure, they have created a bubble for themselves, one of their own choosing as an extension of their understanding of their faith tradition. One point I observed: they surely seemed happy. Not in a fake way that we see on social media but authentically happy.

Once you leave that world and dip back into normal life, it’s just undeniable. The headlines are filled with tragedy at home and abroad, much of it an outgrowth of population despair. The list is familiar: learning loss, substance addiction, suicide ideation, public and private violence, massive and well-earned distrust of everything and everyone, raging conflict at all levels of society.

It’s hard consolation that so many predicted this outcome of the pandemic response. We knew from the empirical literature that unemployment is associated with suicide, that isolation is connected with personal despair, that loss of community leads to psychopathology, that dependency on substances produces ill health.

So many warned of this outcome from what governments did. In many ways, the world before lockdowns seemed fixable. Afterwards, too much is broken and ruined to imagine redemption.

A good example for me is mainstream corporate media. There was a time when I could listen to NPR or read the New York Times (NYT) and disagree but think: well, that’s a perspective I reject but still I benefit from knowing it. It seemed like we were all part of the same national conversation.

This is no longer true. What made the difference? Probably the realization that they are not just confused or pushing some biased outlook but rather actively covering up and lying. Realizing that is incredibly disorienting.

There is something about pretending that the lockdowns and all that followed were completely normal that discredits them. They do it constantly. Sometimes the media will report on learning loss or the suicide epidemic or rising ill health in the population. But there seems to be this studious attempt to pretend that no one knows why it is happening.

Or my least favorite tactic: pretending as if the pandemic necessitated all this and that it was not an outgrowth of deliberate decision-making on the part of elites.

This stuff makes me want to scream: they locked us down when it was totally unnecessary!

As my friend Aaron Kheriaty often observes, they believe we are stupid. They actually think we cannot make connections, have no memory, no knowledge of anything serious, and will just eat up their porridge of baloney daily while exercising no critical intelligence over any of it.

This rubs me wrong particularly on the subject of the mRNA shots designed to address the virus. We know for certain that they were oversold and failed in all the ways they were supposed to succeed. We are further flooded with evidence of their harms both from personal experience and the scientific literature.

But do we read or hear about this in the legacy media? Absolutely not. Even when it is overwhelmingly clear that the shot should be considered a possible cause in the sudden rise of heart attacks, sudden death, turbo cancers, and maladies of all sorts, this whole subject is somehow unsayable in the corporate media.

The silence on this topic is so conspicuous and apparent that it discredits everything else. And what is the reason for it? Well, pharma advertising provides a stunning 75 percent of revenue for mainline television. That’s an astounding number. The networks are simply not going to bite the hand that feeds them.

That’s true for TV and probably something similar applies to everything else too.

What does this mean for the rest of us? It means that every time we turn on the TV, we are risking getting propagandized by companies that are seriously in league with the government to generate the highest possible revenue stream for themselves regardless of the consequences.

And why zero focus on vaccine injury? Incredibly, the companies themselves are indemnified against liability for any harms they cause. Just think about the implications of this. Even if you know for sure that you have been harmed by a product you were forced or otherwise manipulated to take, there is almost nothing you can do about it.

That’s an incredible fact, and goes a very long way toward explaining the silent treatment.

The discrediting of major media in this context reveals a deeper and more terrifying truth. Much of the elite class of economic and social managers do not have our best interests in mind. Once you realize this, the color of the world changes for you. Once you gain that insight, there is pretty much no going back from it.

Millions have come to this realization over the last four years. It has changed us as people. We desperately want to live normal happy lives but we are overwhelmed by what we’ve learned. It’s like the curtain was pulled back and we have seen what is really going on. The whole of official culture is screaming at us to ignore that man behind the curtain.

I’ve recently taken my own advice and thrown myself into reading history as a refuge. My choice was probably not the best if my goal was to brighten my spirits. I have been reading “The Vampire Economy” by German economist and financier Gunter Reimann, published in 1939 (and which I scanned and uploaded with the author’s permission).

The book was written as the Nazi Party had gained full control of government (and everything else) and the full war in Europe was about to commence with the German invasion of Poland.

Reimann brilliantly dissects the reality of a regime that cared nothing for the spreading suffering of the people.

“Nazi leaders in Germany do not fear possible national economic ruin in wartime,” he writes.

“They feel that, whatever happens, they will remain on top, that the worse matters become, the more dependent on them will be the propertied classes. And if the worst comes to the worst, they are prepared to sacrifice all other interests to maintain their hold on the State. If they themselves must go, they are ready to pull the temple down with them.”

That’s a bracing analysis and it could apply to many regimes in history, not just the Nazis. Indeed, good government in history has rarely been the norm. Power often benefits from suffering. As Americans we are not used to thinking this way about our elites. But it is probably time to realize that this trajectory is very much in play.

This might be the most striking change among millions of Americans over the last five or so years. We’ve come to realize that our leaders in so many sectors of American life (or global life, for that matter) do not favor our best interests. This is a troubling realization but it explains so much. It’s why the elites did not care about the harms of lockdowns or untested shots and are unconcerned about inflation, mass immigration, the rise of crime, squatting and the insecurity of property, exploding government debt, growing population surveillance, or anything like the normal rules of civilized life.

The regime, in the broadest possible way we can conceive of that term, simply doesn’t care. Even worse, it grows and benefits at our expense. They know it. We know it. They like it this way.