California Lawmakers Refuse to Accept Any Limits on Their Power

Only a return to constitutional principles can save the Golden State.

(Page 2 of 2)

Last December, Lieu threatened legislative action against the home-improvement chain Lowe’s after it pulled its ads from a TV show called All American Muslim. Even if one agrees that pulling the ads was bigoted, as the always politically correct Lieu claims, shouldn’t private companies have the right to pick and choose where they advertise?

Lieu did author one good bill, which celebrates the anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution. That makes it even more ironic that he and his allies spent most of the legislative year shredding the document they want to celebrate.

The Constitution was designed to put boundaries around government so that it protects our life, liberty, and property without intruding on our freedoms. California’s government, in its hubris, recognizes no such limits. Until Californians rediscover the importance of limiting their government, we will be at the mercy of the petty totalitarians who run the Capitol.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Almanian's Evil Twin||

    It's been a while, but since you mention it - fuck California.

    That is all.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Fuck Michigan, too!

    Also, Google celebrates the 46th Anniversary of Star Trek.

  • fried wylie||

    46th? Just couldn't wait 4 years? Or is the celebration traveling back from the future due to reversed neutron polarity?

  • ||

    We had to celebrate now, since this is the last chance before the end of the Mayan calendar, duh.

  • Teaching Student||

    Holy Hell I want to get out of this damned state.... Reason only mentions a tiny fraction of all the bullshit here... it's not possible to mention even half of it.

  • sarcasmic||

    Are families incapable of making personal decisions without the dictates of regulators and legislators?

    Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha haaa!

    Wheeeeeew! That was good!

  • fried wylie||

    You submitted the appropriate forms to obtain a permit for that guffaw, right?

  • ||

    Are you a licensed questioner?

  • Scarecrow Repair||

    I'll show you mine if you show me yours.

  • Hyperion||

    Anyone who thinks these loonies are going to stop now or even slow down just don't fully realize what we are dealing with here. But I would think the display of insanity the last few days at the DNC might start turning the light on for a quite a few more people. The leftists only know one way to go, FORWARD at exponentially increasing speed, right off the proverbial cliff.

  • Scarecrow Repair||



    The only issues off the table involve fixing those budgetary and governmental problems that the state government is legitimately tasked with handling

    Well, at least they're nothing like the *Federal* government... that would be horrible.

  • LSchwartz||

    Seems like those are the two areas that most need fixing. If our budget system wasn't so complicated and confusing maybe we wouldn't have so many problems and same with the operation of government. Right now every dollar that comes into the state has already been allocated to somewhere before it even gets there. The state promises the different departments a certain amount of money and then when it doesn't come in they scramble around and put measures in front of the people to raise their taxes again to pay for it and threaten that if they don't they will cut something important, like education..

  • Paul.||

    The problem as I see it as it pertains to local government, especially in urban areas is that government attracts people who aren't regular people who live and work in the community in any way which actually represents their constituents.

    They aren't business owners, IT managers, grocery store clerks, construction workers, truck drivers, dock workers, dog trainers, tobacco purveyors, auto mechanics... they're none of these things.

    They're an amalgam of community organizers, activists, non-profit executives-- think Obama but at the local scale.

    Here in Seattle, you get a mayor who ran the local chapter of the Sierra Club, you get a transportation secretary who was a critical mass biking activist. Another guy was a global anti-poverty worker. Once in a while you'll get a lawyer, but even then they worked for some legal team that concentrated on "social justice" issues. Another was a legal advisor to the Rainier Valley Community Development Fund. The closest thing you get to a real job is once in a while one was a columnist for the Times or the PI-- who spent all their time covering these groups I just mentioned. They're all professional, long time government apparatchiks.

    Their brains simply aren't wired to think in any way except an interventionist way.

    "I'm pro-intervention". That woman in the Reason DNC video summed it up nicely. We're done here.

  • ||

    And then there's banning the bans. When San Francisco banned circumcision in the city, the state legislature passed a law which banned California municipalities from passing such bans.

  • Paul.||

    I'm all for banning bans.

    In Washington, the state bans any municipal legislation which bans guns.

    In fact, it bans any gun restrictions that go further than any state restrictions.

  • ||

    Frankly, I'm not convinced that banning the bans is the right way to go about it.

    "[A]ny municipal legislation which bans guns" ought to be attacked in the courts on constitutional grounds; those bans are wrong because the 2nd Amendment, not because the state dog can mount the municipal dog.

    I'm far from being a constitutional expert, so this is only my considered opinion; I'm open to arguments why state bans on municipal bans is the correct solution to the problem.

  • Paul.||

    My response was partial snark, but only partial.

    To be specific, we live under some semblence of gun restrictions in this country, like them or not.

    Some places are more liberal than others, and as it stands, Washington is surprisingly liberal on gun laws considering it's a bluer-than-blue-found-in-nature blue state.

    What the state law says is that no municipality may enact any restriction or regulation which goes beyond the state statutes.

    I actually think that's pretty reasonable. It doesn't really say anything about banning guns, but I do strongly believe it's the only reason there is no defacto gun ban in Seattle like there is in Chicago. It's because they can't.

  • blackjack||

    I'm pretty sure it's illegal to comment on this...


    Lieu did author one good bill, which celebrates the anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution.

    Wrong. A meaningless, symbolic gesture, and a waste of tax dollars. You should know better.

  • Alan||

    When legislators author bills to honor a thing, presume that they honor it in name to make up for violating it in deed.



  • Public Citizzen||

    "Everything that is not banned is mandatory"
    People have started voting with their feet, the people with the MONEY have started voting with their feet.
    Businesses and individuals who are fed up with the out of control gerrymandered state of affairs in Sacramento are leaving the state in ever increasing numbers.
    The whole situation will implode when there are no more businesses and wealth individuals left to loot. The first tremors of the impending disaster are being seen in the increasing number of cities declaring bankruptcy.
    The gravy train is off the rails, the wheels just haven't stopped turning yet.

  • Alan||

    "Sen. Ted Lieu, the Torrance Democrat who authored the gay-therapy ban, called the therapy “quackery,” but now teens and parents are more likely to head to real quacks—shamans without licenses or training. Or they will turn to religious practitioners."

    Um - psychologists, trained shamans, untrained shamans, religious practitioners ... the author is implying that there is some difference between these, but I can't see it.

  • George26||

    "One of the very few benefits of having liberal Democrats running everything in California is that they won’t be meddling in our bedrooms, as the cliché goes. But the gay-change therapy ban shows that liberal activists can be even more meddlesome in people’s personal lives than conservatives."

    And who has been responsible for this "cliche?"

  • dig mart||

    Government should protect citizens 。

  • Rosie||

    Absolutely! Right now, Sacramento is more focused on keeping donors happy than representing and addressing our needs.

  • SusanM||

    Okay. I find it very telling that Reason spent seven paragraphs extolling the virtues of anti-gay brainwashing. Not merely mentioning the ban but actually defending and promoting the practice.

    Homosexuality may not be "normal" in the sense that a lot of people are gay but it is not an illness or a defect - it's the way some people are made. Having homosexual inclinations, thoughts or fantasies is also entirely normal. Ex-gay therapy (or any other kind) is not needed. It only promotes irrational fear.

  • Sevo||

    SusanM| 9.8.12 @ 10:53AM |#
    "Okay. I find it very telling that Reason spent seven paragraphs extolling the virtues of anti-gay brainwashing."

    Uh, reading, How does it work?
    Nothing in the entire article 'extolled the virtues of anti-gay brainwashing'.

  • Suellington||

    If you are against a ban on something then you must naturally be in favour of whatever is being banned. That is how it works, right Susan?

  • ||

    you mock her, as is justified, but it really is astounding how people think this way

    i am against the ridiculous smoking ban in bars, for example. but i fucking HATE cigarette smoke. it's just not the place of govt. to tell a BAR whether they can allow smoking or not

    the points about the state preemption firearms ban are spot on btw

    seattle ALREADY tried to get around it via executive order with a ban on guns in parks. the AG et al told them it was illegal. the mayor DID NOT CAR. he passed the executive order

    a lawyer set himself up with standing by calling the PD telling them he was going to the park and was armed and would meet them there. he got "trespassed" from the park (told to leave since he was armed) and he had his case

    seattle lost

    seattle city council members (might have been licata i don't recall off hand) have been on record saying they would support a handgun BAN in seattle if they could get one passed

    btw, this story is just another example of how much california sucks and how much WA is way better

    we are fucking libertopia compared to cali

  • dinkster||

    Yes why have licensed psychologists weigh in when Democrats and SusanM and wave their hands and say "it's the way some people are made." Who was the anti-science party again? Good grief.

  • osahon||

    Exactly. They should stick to one side of the fence. I'm personally all for people doing whatever they want to do with their life as long as it doesn't affect others. That includes even when said people don't have the same ideals as I do.

  • rgwesdgwe||

    Here are More characteristics, novel style,varieties,and good quality low price

  • ||

    This article, and the comments accompanying it spell out exactly how government grows into a many-tentacled behemoth that strangles liberty. I think it is a keeper.

  • Peabo||

    I was born and raised in California. Nice weather. But I got the hell out a few months ago. Never been happier.

  • yweuijhbcf||

    Here are More characteristics, novel style,varieties,and good quality low price

  • osahon||

    Our legislature has so many issues from the ground up that it is difficult to determine where to start fixing things. Pension reform? tax reform? School reform?

    Before we even consider bloating the bureaucracy more with laws and money, we should worry about the problems we already have.

  • Rosie||

    Of course the legislature doesn't want to limit its own power. More generally, they do not want us looking too closely at them, for fear that we will see how blatantly they waste our money and pander to special interests, ignoring us until they need more money. Enough is enough!

  • jmccroskey||

    Of course they do not want limits on their power. They would like to continue their path of irresponsible spending with NO accountability. We need to see improvements in both of these areas. They need to be more accountable to the voters, whose money they are squandering!

  • LSchwartz||

    It is pretty pathetic where our state is at right now. I know we are one of the largest economies in the world but that doesn't mean our economy is doing well or has a good system. I'm really tired of hearing that we have problems and that nothing is being done to fix them. Instead their solution always seems to be to raise taxes. Which I get needs to happen every once in a while but if our system worked better and all the money that comes in wasn't already tied up to go to one thing then maybe when the legislature makes a mistake like agreeing to increase pensions before they had the money to do so the people wouldn't suffer because of it. Now we have the tough choice of agreeing to what they are asking and paying for the pensions or watching the schools and colleges be cut drastically again...

  • Janae||

    Politicians care more about fattening their pockets. It is sad to see the level of political power abuse. Instead of using that authority to rebuild California, they are singlehandedly breaking the state down!

  • Janae||

    Voters need their voices back, and the only way to make sure that happens is to silence special interests and donors.


Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties