Declaration Of Non Ownership Ca Dmv: Fill & Download for Free

Gray Davis was, I think, a victim of circumstances. He was getting blamed for the economy and the electricity problem. He had also made some unpopular decisions, signing anti-gun legislation and a decision about Prop 187, but those by themselves probably were not going to be enough for a recall to be successful. Enron, electricity, and the aftermath of the dotcom bubble brought in enough people to make the recall happen.In case you don’t know, California has a number of asinine laws that govern its power supply. The legal regime makes it difficult to build more power generation in state. Now, combine that with an expanding population and de-regulation of the sale of electricity and there was a recipe for disaster.Part of the problem was that power providers could only buy power from the generators one day in advance. They could not hedge against spikes in production costs. Another part of the “de-regulation” of the power industry in California, was to cap the price distributors could charge. Eventually, you had a situation where the price for the energy bought by the power companies made it a loss to sell to the customers.Another thing to realize was that the capping of prices to the end-users meant that there was no incentive to be efficient in their use of energy. Electricity was cheap for businesses and homes and so no one cut back or got newer, more efficient energy-using devices. So demand was skyrocketing and the power distribution companies were losing money.To put it in perspective, from 1990 to 2000, California population increase 13%. Not a single new power plant was built in this period.A good chunk of why the prices were soaring had to do with Enron. They were manipulating the market. What they did was get control of the power suppliers. Then during low power uses, they would shut down the plants for maintenance. This would then force the California energy distribution companies to have to buy power on the “spot market”. The spot market was not regulated like the regular power supply market. So the producers could gouge the distribution companies.The power manipulation was made easier by California’s overworked, and largely un-improved power grid. Basically, the old infrastructure became a bottleneck for power distribution.The effect of all this were rolling blackouts. By December 15, 2000, the price of for wholesale power had risen to $1400 per megawatt hour. A year before, it was been $45 per megawatt hour. People were getting angry.It probably didn’t help that Gray Davis was connected with Los Angeles. Why? Because of a wrinkle in the regulatory scheme, LA County didn’t really suffer the blackouts like the rest of the state because LA DWP was able to generate electricity and sold it to Southern California Edison (SCE) which meant LA County had brown outs but not rolling blackouts.So through all of this, retail prices remained capped in 2000. Because of the price gouging, SCE and PG&E were living off credit and wracking up huge debts. Their bonds were reduced to junk status. Basically, they were bankrupt, but because they are public utilities they can’t go bankrupt (maybe I’m saying that wrong but you get the gist I hope).At this point, on January 17, 2001, Governor Davis steps in and declares a state of emergency. This allows the state to buy energy on the open market. And the open market was not kind to California. The purchase of power incurred huge debts to the state. For the next two years, the state would have to buy power.Now, let me take a moment to say that price gouging did happen, but there were other factors that inflated the price as well. Remember, this was the early 2000s and fuel prices were going up because of the War on Terror. Enron, however, was doing everything it could to gouge California. Their CEO even boasted to the California Power Authority that “In the final analysis, it doesn’t matter what you crazy people in California do, because I got smart guys who can always figure out how to make money.”Lay wasn’t wrong. It’s just eventually Enron imploded from all the shady stuff they were doing. Go read about it, and remember that Charles Krugman (who now has a cushy gig at the NYT) was one of Lay’s “smart guys”.Now Davis gets blamed for his response. He was too slow to step up. He did too much. He did too little. The problem was the regulatory scheme. It invited predators like Enron and handicapped the power companies while at the same time putting a hard cap on prices. It was a de-regulation scheme in name only.This coincided with the recession that came at the end of the Clinton Administration and the start of the Bush Administration. During his first two years of office, Davis had been able to keep the spending down to have a reserve. In 1999 it was 10% of he budget and in 2000 it was 4%. He had managed the Democrats impulse to spend and focused it in some areas, including education funding increases. The twin problem of energy and recession wiped away all that stating in 2002 when the state’s budget projected a shortfall of $23.6 billion and the following year a shortfall of $34.6 billion.So what was Davis to do? He started to raise taxes. Among them, the vehicle licensing fee. Californians were pissed about the energy problems. But the moment he announced he was tripling (Or something like that) the vehicle licensing fee, people were angry enough to actually recall him. It was the first time a recall effort ever succeeded in California, even though a recall effort had been mounted against every California governor since Reagan (including Jerry Brown his first time) had been faced with a recall effort. Given that there have been 117 campaigns for recall, I’m not sure which governors didn’t face one.The campaign to recall Davis was the only one to hit the required numbers of 12% of the votes cast in the previous election. That was how motivated a lot of people were.(For the record, I voted against recall on that part of the ballot.)On the whole, I think Gray Davis tried to deal with the situation but was caught during an unfortunate confluence of events. Looking back, I can’t find what role he played in the de-regulation scheme. But he played the hand the best he could.I think he attempted to strike a moderate, left lea I guess way forward for California that had a semblance of fiscal responsibility. He restrained the Democratic Party’s need to constantly spend more in every pet project that their then-current dogma indicates.Did I like his signing of gun control bills? No, but when he did I was living in another state at the time. Do I think that contributed to his downfall? Not really. The late-90s and early 2000s were a low point for 2nd Amendment rights in the US.Now you have Gavin Newsom. He has done less than nothing to help California.Newsom came to office with an economy that was, on the surface, working well. Silicon Valley and biotechs were making things look good. The proble was rising income disparity and housing. In San Francisco it had been a problem that a large part of my practice dealt with. By the time he was elected in 2019, it was getting out of control. Since then, it has exploded.But where has Newsom been? Absent. He was making headlines attacking Trump. He was attacking Republicans as the problem, because when the Democrats had near super majorities in both houses of the legislature, the problem had to be the GOP. Makes total sense.Some Newsom’s signature acts have been to impose a moratorium on executions of prisoners. (I think that’s wrong. But I accept that other people have the right to be wrong about this issue.) Hes issued clemency to people to prevent them from deported. While I accept that it is his prerogative to grant clemency, he has used it to protect illegal aliens who were convicted of soliciting a hitman to commit murder, committing felonies as a member of a criminal street gang, and grand theft. These are fairly serious felonies committed by the people who were granted clemency. He has basically turns California into a sanctuary state for illegal aliens.The problem that this causes is that it undermines the value of citizenship. We have a DMV that keeps “accidentally” issuing ballots to people who are non-citizens because of the policy to issue CA Drivers Licenses to illegal aliens. As no serious audit has been performed of the DMV in decades, we are not actually sure what the hell DMV has done and have to take their word for it. He’s been silent largely on this issue.Despite year after year of damaging fires raging throughout the state, Newsom persists in laying the blame on “climate change” but doing nothing else. He refuses to do any act that would be perceived as going against the environmental lobby, including working for changes to how the state regulates controlled prescriptive burns. It’s just easier to blame Trump and stand in the ruins of someone’s home than to do something proactive.Newsom has continually allowed PG&E to escape the consequences of its acts. He did nothing when the bribery came to light. Instead of calling for and working for legislation to reign in PG&E (or better yet let it go bankrupt and allow for actual de-regulation to happen).Instead of requiring PG&E to actually act in the interest of the public. Newsom talks about a takeover and other measure to deal with the criminal organization that is PG&E, but he never actually does anything. Maybe that between his campaign and his wife’s films, PG&E contributed $700,000. So California will continue to burn, and most of the state served by PG&E will experience blackouts, because Newsom doesn’t want to anger his political donor.The blackouts are intentional. Because PG&E refuses to commit enough money to operations to maintain the power lines properly (even though there always seem to be bonuses for the executive staff), Northern California gets to have blackouts on the theory that they will turn off the right power lines before they break and cause a new forest fire.Oh, an interesting thing about the blackouts, they never seem to affect two groups: PG&E headquarters, and Newsom’s residence. It’s an interesting coincidence, except that it really isn’t.Newsom has refused to end the boondoggle that is the high speed rail project to nowhere. Billions of dollars have been wasted, much of it to consultants and lobbyists. Some argue that his postponement of further extensions show action, it does nothing for the billions we continued to spend on it to link Bakersfield with Merced for a cost projected to be at least $98.1 billion. The price per kilometer (which shows how bad the costs are, they had to use metric to hide it) is $56million, that’s more than Europe ($22–$36milion per kilometer). That’s $123.2 millions dollars per mile of track.A big issue in California is water. We are a state that has, historically, had a cycle of drought where some years we are flooding and then we will go for years with a drought. This was the state of the land long before anthropomorphic climate change started to be a thing. Now, Newsom claims to be fore improvements to our water system. And even though a bond measure was passed to pay for new storage, guess how much of the money has been allocated to projects? Zero. Why? Because the Delta smelt. Or because of this other environmental concern. He has restated the Delta tunnel project but has scaled it back. But even that is on hold and still at the planning stage.What kinds of laws has he approved? Well he Seems to be a fan of any bill that favors the LGBT+ community. By itself, this isn’t a problem, except when it is. State Senator Scott Wiener has pushed two measures in particular which I have an issue with. The first changed from a felony to a misdemeanor the crime of intentionally infecting a person with AIDS/HIV. The reasoning behind this is there is a similar crime charged as a misdemeanor for intentionally infection someone with hepatitis. Wiener argued that this disparity hurt the LGBT+ community. In my mind, both crimes should be charged as felonies because both essentially are assaults which cause gross bodily injury. Reducing the penalty for harm it causes, even with modern therapies, is wrong.The second piece of legislation I think is that Ben worse. This past legislative session, Senator a Wiener sponsored SB-145. SB-145 decreased the penalties for pedophiles by making it discretionary for the court to impose a sentence that required them to register as sex offenders if they were within 10 years of age of the victim and there was no violence. I think this law is wrong as it decreases the penalties for child milestones simply because there is no violence. It’s irrelevant what the sexual orientation of the victim or perpetrator is. A minor cannot consent to sex. Wiener and Newsom sell it as equalizing the criminal acts based on type of child rape that occurs. Well, if they wanted to do that, they should not have decreased the penalties to the lowest common denominator, they should shave raised them all to the same level. Now, eventually they put a minimum age for the victim at 14, but that still doesn’t solve the problem. A 24 year old should not be having sex with a 14 year old. If they were truly worried about Romeo and Juliet, then the age range should have been no more than 4 years.Although not done while in office as Governor, Newsom was the prime backer of Prop 63, which represented a massive curtailment of 2nd Amendment rights. He claims that it was to save lives. However, the laws were not designed in anyway to attack criminal use of firearms, it was designed solely to criminalize the ownership of firearms by otherwise law abiding citizens.While in office, he has continued his assault on our 2nd Amendment protected rights (because California neglected to include a state analog in our constitution). He recently signed a law that required that for every new pistol on the firearms roster maintained by the state, three have to come off. If the pistol is not on the roster, it cannot be sold through a gun store (there is an exception where people who move into the state with a non-roster pistol can sell theirs, either privately or on consignment). So not only has he helped make it harder to legally own a firearm, he is actively working to decrease the availability of legal gun sales.Not content with that, Newsom has supported California’s Gun Violence Restraining Order laws. He has signed legislation expanding them. Now on the surface, this is a good idea: get guns away from people before they commit a crime. But the basic problem is: how do you predict who will commit the crime. Then there is the next problem: the level of proof necessary to deprive a person of their rights is absurdly low. These are bad laws which there is no data, nor can there be, to show them as being effective.The fact that Newsom supports them indicates his view of rights. Essentially: he believes the government has the power to deprive a person of their rights based on fear. And that is the problem. If you support Newsom, and you support these GVROs, ask yourself if you’d want Trump (or whomever is your personal bogeyman) to have this kind of power.Now we come to Newsom and the pandemic. Initially, I supported his course of action. However, as March became April and then May, I began to change my opinion. Newsom has become too easy with using the tyrannical (in the original Roman sense) powers that the state has allowed him to accumulate. He is arbitrary and capricious in how he uses them. BLM protests are allowed, but a peaceful protest against his gubernatorial dictates is met harshly on the steps of the capital building in Sacramento. Houses of worship remain closed. The teachers unions are coddled and allowed to make outrageous demands (like no in-person teaching until there are zero deaths from COVID-19).Every time we start to open up and cases rise, he shuts us back down again. He imposed masks mandates, which Californians has obeyed. Doesn’t seem to do any good since he keeps shutting the state back down based on this absurd tiered system that favors certain counties and attempts to punish others.Now he has issued limits on who can be over for Thanksgiving and other get togethers. However, when he wants to go dinner with a gaggle of aides and lobbyists, he is somehow exempt from the rules.If he were a man of principle, he would abide by the rules he enforces and requires against the rest of us.If he were a leader, he would lead by example. But he does. Somehow, his business interests are always unaffected. Somehow, he’s allowed to do what the rest of us are told are against the rules.So the answer to the question: Newsom is worse. Davis was a better governor but suffered because he was not a vibrant personality. Newsom loves attention but is a terrible governor.