Still reeling from a wild weather season, California chalked up a fourth request for federal disaster aid, as Gov. Jerry Brown lodged the request en route to Washington earlier this month.

“Putting the price tag of California’s brutal winter storms at $569 million, Gov. Jerry Brown asked President Trump […] for a fourth federal disaster declaration to help speed up recovery and repairs across the state,” the Los Angeles Times noted. “The estimate of damages, a number calculated jointly by state and federal teams, was accompanied in Brown’s letter by a long list of storm damage that left Californians fleeing flood waters and a number of roadways damaged by slipping hillsides and erosion.”

Despite some friction between Brown and Trump over changes to federal law that could cut against the grain of state Democrats’ priorities, the president hasn’t hesitated to grant the governor’s wishes for relief. “Brown’s request for a federal disaster declaration follows three similar requests this winter amid widespread weather-related damage. The three earlier appeals were granted, expediting assistance for flooding, problems on roads and bridges and other issues,” the San Francisco Chronicle recalled. “The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services has also requested assistance from the U.S. Small Business Administration for individuals in Colusa, Lake, Lassen, Plumas, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz counties, where the flooding from February storms damaged more than 200 homes and businesses.”

The most recent grant came mid-month, in the midst of Brown’s latest request. “President Donald J. Trump declared a major disaster exists in the state of California and ordered federal assistance to supplement state, tribal and local recovery efforts in the areas affected by severe winter storms, flooding and mudslides from January 18 to January 23, 2017,” the White House announced.

Careful politics

Visiting FEMA acting administrator Bob Fenton in D.C., Brown struck a conciliatory tone, but limited it sharply. “Brown, who put the storm damage at well over $500 million, said he came away from the meeting feeling positive after being told that Trump is ‘very concerned’ about disaster relief for California,” according to the Sacramento Bee. “But Brown also stood by his recent denouncement of the Trump administration’s decision to review federal greenhouse gas standards, a move the governor recently characterized as “an unconscionable gift to polluters.”

Brown’s posture chimed closely with public sentiment in the Golden State. “Fifty-three percent of California voters say state leaders should try to work with Trump on areas of disagreement, even if it requires compromises, while 47 percent of voters say California leaders should oppose the president even if it risks losing federal funding to the state,” according to a poll conducted by the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley and reported by Politico. “The preference for compromise comes despite Trump’s deep unpopularity in California,” the site added. “Yet in two major areas — the economy and jobs and improving roads and infrastructure — more Californians say Trump administration policies will have a positive than negative effect.”

A cracked mirror

Previously, the administration joined a broader effort in Washington to reckon with the consequences of California’s sometimes crumbling infrastructure. “Trump declared a presidential emergency during last month’s crisis at Oroville Dam,” the Sacramento bee noted. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, lawmakers broadened their view of similar challenges nationwide. “The recent events at the Oroville dam in California, together with ice jam flooding on other major waterways and other flooding events, has forced the Environment and Public Works Committee to take up the status of U.S. dam, levee and other flood control infrastructure,” the Washington Examiner reported. “The new chairman of the committee, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, has made infrastructure development a top issue for the panel this Congress, in light of President Trump’s focus on infrastructure and job development.”

By Katy Grimes

The state of California is pushing welfare and food stamps very hard. They constantly advertise on the radio and television, and must have a huge public relations budget… paid for courtesy of taxpayers.

Here’s one ad for the “Women, infants and children” program:

Welcome to the WIC Show!
The show about WIC, for WIC and by WIC!

On our channel you’ll find five half-hour episodes made up of different segments that will interest everyone, especially parents of young children and pregnant women. 

The shows are designed to reinforce California’s Women, Infants and Children (WIC) education programs, highlight WIC service while at the same time entertain WIC clients.

Once you are in these programs, you get hooked into other programs: county health care, housing, school, daycare. Eventually, the government runs everything in the lives of those on government assistance. It’s no wonder President barack Obama got reelected.

CalFresh

The WIC ad says, “the food program is not a welfare program,” but you have a state case worker.

We can’t even call welfare what it is.

Food-stamp benefits usage is at an all time high. 46 million Americans are on welfare and use food stamps. One-third of all welfare recipients are in California.

The name of the California welfare food stamp program was changed to “CalFresh,” to take the stigma out of using welfare benefits. Recipients are given a debit card so they look like every other shopper when purchasing their items.

In Los Angeles County, more than one million people are signed up for the food stamp and welfare benefits, ranging from $200 to $1,500 a month.

In 2011, the federal Department of Food and Agriculture went all out on a national media awareness program. Here is a schedule of media buys in just L.A. County.

This was done because in some areas, welfare agencies believed that communities were “under served.” In Sacramento County, the Board of Supervisors even got involved, allowing the Sacramento Hunger Coalition to drive a campaign to expand the number of recipients.

“The Sacramento Hunger Coalition was founded in 1989 and now resides as a project of the Sacramento Housing Alliance’s Coalition on Regional Equity (CORE)’s food justice work,” the website says.

What a clever way to expand government. But welfare has become a giant ponzi scheme.

Even more interesting, is the list of publications below from the Sacramento Hunger Coalition… the links go nowhere. But this was what the entire hunger in Sacramento campaign was based on.

Hunger Hits Home 2012: Understanding & Combating Hunger in Sacramento County

A Primer on the Restaurant Meals Program in California: Preventing Hunger Among the Elderly, Disabled & Homeless in the Golden State

Homeless Nutrition Education Toolkit: A Resource for Nutrition Educators and Emergency Food Providers

Hunger and Homelessness in Sacramento: 2010 Hunger & Food Insecurity Report

I finally found one of the reports on hunger in Sacramento – I hope no one got paid to produce this.

Other government advertising

I hear government paid radio ads for bullying, FEMA, flood insurance,  Homeland security disaster preparedness,  the CA Earthquake Authority insurance, and ads about housing discrimination, paid for by the federal Housing and Urban Development department.

What a scam, all paid for by taxpayers.

Katy Grimes: Thursday was “The Great California Shake Out,” earthquake preparedness day. I had the great fortune to be at the CalEPA building for a California Air Resources Board meeting in Sacramento, where we were expected to “drop, cover, and hold on.”

As I huddled on the floor with my notebook over my head, hoping that the carpet was clean, I wondered why there has been such a big media push by the Earthquake Authority.

Last year I contacted the California Earthquake Authority to ask who they are and why they advertise so much. The public information officer I spoke with was uncomfortable with my questions and wanted to know why I wanted to know. Finally I got him to tell me that the CEA is a publicly managed, mostly privately funded organization that provides catastrophic residential earthquake insurance. He was insistent that they are not a public agency.

Anyone who owns a home and lives within an officially designated earthquake area must have earthquake insurance. But I still find it highly suspicious that the earthquake authority is publicly managed and “largely privately funded,” especially since many homeowners are not given a choice about carrying earthquake insurance.

The Great California Shake Out program has plastered the airwaves recently and news lately, along with the CEA’s commercials about its insurance. The Great California Shake Out website is a bit of a mystery until you scroll down to the bottom of the page. The sponsors are FEMA, the Southern California Earthquake Center at USC, California Earthquake Authority, California Emergency Management Agency, the United States Geological Survey, American Red Cross and State Farm Insurance Company.

The other strange group attached is the Earthquake Country Alliance, the organizer of California’s annual earthquake drill, a project of the USC earthquake center, funded by the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Geological Survey. The National Science Foundation doesn’t actually do work, they fund other groups.

It’s all about the publicly-funded grants.

Obviously California earthquakes are real, but do a dozen agencies, boards, commissions and companies need to be involved? It’s a drain on public funds.

And their commercials are stupid.