Candidate for
State Senator; District 7

My experience as a teacher since 1977 and crime study assistant in 1993 shows clearly that we have an untapped potential as human beings. We need to start applying scientific principles to all of our public and social institutions to solve the problems that exist.

It is possible to ELIMINATE CRIME, not just fight it. It is possible to educate our children to use more of their potential and develop MORALS and ETHICS without introducing religion into our schools. It is possible to have political reform that elimates the overwhelming power and influence of corporate and PAC money. It is possible to have a REPRESENTATIVE in Sacramento that doesn't claim to have all of the answers but instead listens to you, the voters.

Crime can be prevented. Drug abuse can be stopped. Education can be rewarding and fulfilling. Our current disease-care sytem can be transformed into true HEALTH CARE and promotion. And it will COST LESS!

The savings can be plowed into educational improvements and infrastructure (roads, water systems, etc.).

Government has certain areas of responsibility that it is not meeting, in this priority order:

1. Safety and Protection of Citizens and Natural Resources
2. Health, Education, and Welfare
3. Development of Infrastructures, Systems, Higher Education
4. Prosperity and Enlightenment of ALL Citizens

We, as a government and as a people, are currently failing in most, if not all, of these areas. My priority is to work on each area successively, realizing savings from one area to fund progress in another. My first two years will be focused on level one, above. The remainder of this overview will follow this focus.

Safety and protection of its citizens is the fundamental responsibility of government. Currently, our government is not meeting its obligations in this area. NO government in our State can GUARANTEE the safety of its citizens.

The result is a climate of fear and chaos in many of our inner cities, and now even our suburbs. The prevalence of guns in society is indicative of this climate of fear.

Without a safe and protected population, all other governmental functions are truly a farce. Without meeting its basic reason for existing, our government cannot be said to be truly governing. Only once the safety of all citizens can be ensured can the government begin to govern. Until then, we are simply putting up a window dressing to cover a social disgrace.

Can we actually guarantee safety?

Yes, we can! What we need is a new approach. That seems obvious. If the old approach does not work, it is time for a new one. What is less obvious to the average person is what this new approach should be.

Normally, you might think that if crime is the problem, we have to have more law enforcement and more interdiction to interrupt and stop crime that is going on. Another common approach is make stiffer penalties for criminals, thinking that we are getting the "bad apples" off the street, thereby making it safe for the rest of us "law-abiding" citizens.

The truth of the matter is that both of these approaches, although partly successful, are extremely expensive. Although I don't have exact figures on this, let's assume for the moment that I am correct in saying that it costs $100,000 per year for each additional policeman on the beat. Incarcerating a single criminal costs $30,000 per year, and it costs another $50,000 to capture, convict, and process the criminal through our justice system.

That's $180,000 for one policeman and to catch one criminal and put him/her in jail for the first year!

That also means the annual expenses of incarceration equal the annual tuition at Stanford University! And what do you think they are learning while in prison? How to be better, more productive citizens? More likely, how to be tougher and meaner criminals, less likely to be caught next time.

What do studies on these issues tell us?

We now know a number of different things:

1. Most criminals are repeat offenders (nearly 95 out of 100)
2. Most crime goes unpunished (8 out of 10 are not caught)
3. Rehabilitation works (when put into practice)
4. New research provides a preventive solution

Based upon this information, any approach to fighting crime must be two-pronged. It must address those most at risk for creating more crime (those already convicted), and it must address the social factors that contribute to crime (social stresses and tensions).

Rehabilitation programs put in place in California, Vermont, and in the country of Senegal have proved successful. They involve stress management, physical exercise, and programs to increase the intelligence and creative thinking of inmates. Of particular note were studies done in Senegal, where after two years of practice, the prisons were nearly emptied Nation-wide! Unfortunately, a change in administration abandoned their former successes, and now Senegal faces their former problems.

California has also seen a change in political climate, where it is now more fashionable to "lock them up and throw away the key" than it is to work on assisting criminals turning their lives around and preventing future transgressions. We now have something called "prison industries," and it is a major lobbying force in Sacramento. Apparently, we now care more about producing license plates, or whatever, and need to ensure that we have the cheap labor available in the ranks of our prisoners.

Over forty studies since 1974 have shown the effectiveness of social approaches to preventing crime. The most recent was conducted during the summer of 1993 in Washington, DC, then the murder capital of the US. I was fortunate enough to assist with this study.

Working closely with the Metro Police Department and the FBI, we studied the results of introducing a more peaceful atmosphere to the DC area. The results were an astounding success! At the peak of the 8-week study period, violent crime was reduced over 23% (15.5% overall)! It increased back to its former levels soon after our study concluded.

In combination with the other studies done in this area, the odds are less than 1 in 1 BILLION that this was random coincidence! In other words, we have isolated a cost-effective, proven solution on preventing crime! It is now our social obligation to implement the same program(s) here. To not do so would be irresponsible, if not criminal!

My proposal is GUARANTEED!

Based upon these studies, I feel confident in guaranteeing the results. If we implement similar programs to prevent crime in this district, they will be successful. Assuming we implement the program(s), if violent crime is not reduced by 20% over my term in office, I will refund to the taxpayers or donate to charity 50% of my salary as State Senator!

The specifics are as follows: Hire and train 600 people to participate in this program. We can base it in the Concord area and call it the "Port Chicago Model Peace Project," in honor of those who lost their lives in defense of the safety of our country. Pay them an honest wage of $1500/month, with a minimum one-year commitment. These may be college students looking for a lighter load for a year, homeless persons, work-release candidates, retired persons, or other interested parties. They will become our first group of professional peace makers. With salaries, rent, heating, administration, etc., it will total $15 million annually.

The savings of reduced police overtime or new hiring, reduced loss of life and hospitalization from violent crime, reduced human suffering and property damages, reduced court costs, reduced cost of incarceration, etc., will more than compensate for this investment. And the best thing is, I guarantee it!

There are other aspects of public safety, such as factory and industrial safety, and these certainly need to be addressed, but the above programs will have the most impact immediately. The results will be real, and the cost savings will be just as real. Maintaining this focus, we can accomplish other goals as they are presented, but we need to address safety first.

I would expect that we will be able to redirect our cost savings found in Level One to issues in Level Two.

Let us now examine one issue that is getting a great amount of Press in this race for State Senate, where I think the other candidates miss the point, and that is Gun Control.

I think I am fare in stating the basic view of the Democrat is that guns, especially "assault-type" weapons and handguns, need to be carefully regulated, if not altogether banned. The view is that guns are dangerous and are part of too much crime. Correct me if I'm wrong, Assemblyman Torlakson.

The view of the Republicans (incumbent Senator Rainey and challenger Daryl Chilimidos) is shared that guns are an individual right for law-abiding citizens for sport or protection needs, and that government should not unnecessarily infringe upon this "right." However, those guns which are politically unpopular ("assault-type" weapons) are also viewed as needing restrictions or banning.

The Democrat and Republicans MISS THE POINT!

Guns, are not the issue; CRIME is the issue. Without crime (or with less of it), the need for the law-abiding citizen to seek personal protection from a gun will be diminished, if not eliminated. Although guns may be used in many crimes, the crime would still continue without the gun. Instead, criminals would be using knives, or baseball bats, or whatever was handy.

Eliminate the environment that fosters crime, and you will eliminate the need for guns. Then, and only then, in a safer and more sane environment, can we decide whether it is a rational policy to allow the proliferation of lethal weapons throughout our society. First, we have to address the cause (crime), and then we can address the symptoms (guns).

In case there is any doubt, let me be 100% clear: Let's not change existing gun laws, as the Governor suggests. Instead, let us put our focus where it belongs: on crime prevention. Crime can be prevented. Your vote makes all the difference.