Home › Crime, Courts & Public Safety › Public Safety
Judge may order prison-facility payment
Judge to order Kelso's requested hearing
Download this story as a podcast!
STORY TOOLS 
More from Public SafetySAN FRANCISCO — Calling Attorney General Jerry Brown's attempt to block state funding for new prison healthcare facilities "nothing more than political meddling," a federal judge on Monday indicated he will soon order the state to pay the first $250 million installment on an $8 billion construction project.
Federal District Court Judge Thelton Henderson, clearly irritated at what he called an "eleventh-hour change of heart" by state officials, appeared ready to grant a request from prison healthcare receiver J. Clark Kelso that he order a hearing in two weeks. At that hearing, state officials would be expected to report how and when the money will be paid or be held in contempt.
Henderson said he would issue his order "in the next couple of days."
Kelso's plan calls for the construction of seven stand-alone healthcare facilities that would house about 1,500 inmates each. The grounds of the Ventura Youth Correctional Facility near Camarillo has been selected as a
potential site for one of those projects.
To carry out his plan, Kelso needs $250 million through the end of this year and would then need a definite plan for providing $3.5 billion in construction money between Jan. 1 and June 30, 2009.
In the 2 1/2 years since a receiver was appointed, Henderson noted that state officials have never contested plans to build new facilities to bring prison medical care up to constitutional standards.
"The state has actively participated in every step along the way," he said. "Defendants have never — not once — informed the court of any concerns about that plan. No one has ever argued that new facilities are not essential to establishing constitutional standards for healthcare."
Now that the first bills are coming due, however, Brown is challenging the scope of the receiver's plan as well as the court's authority to order the construction of prisons as part of the remedy. The attorney general is representing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Controller John Chiang, the two state officials who could be held in contempt if construction financing is not provided.
Brown, who is expected to be a candidate for governor in 2010, appeared briefly in the back of the courtroom during Monday's proceeding. Deputy Attorney General Daniel Powell argued for the state.
In an apparent reference to Brown's gubernatorial ambitions, Henderson said "the desire to be elected to office will have no bearing on these proceedings."
Powell argued that while the Schwarzenegger administration supported a bill to provide bond financing for the receiver's construction plan, the expectation was always that funding would be provided with the support of the Legislature.
After lawmakers rejected the bond proposal four times, he said, circumstances changed.
"There's a big difference in what the receiver can do with the participation of the Legislature and what a receiver can do without the participation of the Legislature," Powell said. "Construction of prisons is a decision for the Legislature to make."
He argued that Kelso's construction plans go beyond a receiver's authority as defined in the federal Prison Litigation Reform Act, which says a receiver must use "the least intrusive means and go no further than necessary" to correct constitutional deficiencies.
Kelso spoke at the hearing and was also represented by noted San Francisco trial attorney James Brosnahan, who has been retained by the receiver's office to handle the legal arguments to attain the funding.
Brosnahan said he hopes the situation can be resolved without any contempt orders issued.
"We don't want to do this," he said. "It would be a terrible day if it has to be done."
Brosnahan suggested Schwarzenegger should evaluate the effectiveness of Brown's defense. "I would think I would want my attorney to be conciliatory, concise and specific," he said. "Contempt is a big deal."
The way to avoid that is clear, he said. "The receiver wants to hear the right words. Show us the green."
Posted by Thinkbeforeyoupost on October 7, 2008 at 3:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
OH please don't make us have to deal with a brown governor again. Jerry Brown that is! If you think Arnold is bad, try and remember Jerry Brown! For those of you that are to young, far out, peace and love man, groovy! These words tell a big story about Brown!
Posted by ebrockway on October 7, 2008 at 6:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Forget Brown.
See what activist liberal judges get you? Carter appointed Henderson, everyone liked him fine as long as he stuck to saving dolphins and civil rights. Now he's putting prisoners in your back yards, maybe think before voting.
Posted by goldeneye on October 7, 2008 at 6:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I say three cheers for Jerry Brown! This judge thinks that he is our king. He thinks that instead of a judge that he is our self-appointed ruler. This is a sign of the end of democracy. What recourse do we have against this thug? Jerry Brown and our governor need to have some guts and defy this judge. Let him send the federal authorities after our leaders. They should be met by California police officers andif necessary, the California National Guard. This is an invasion of sovereignty and a complete over reach by federal judges. If our leaders let this happen we will be forever ruled and owned by unelected self appointed dictators!
Posted by keepin_it_real on October 7, 2008 at 6:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What about the constitutional right of our elderly and the whole mess with medi-cal not paying doctors. Doctors are threatning to close their doors to medi-cal patients? Come on. And they are talking about prisoners rights??? Bass ackwards, don't you think?
Don't give Kelso 1 dime. Give prisoners a bed in the middle of the desert and lock them in with electrical fences. Throw them a little food and water and let them rot, that is the least they deserve. Lets not forget why they are there. Maybe Kelso can sign on as a prison guard.
Posted by keepermel on October 7, 2008 at 7:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You can not get blood out of a turnip! We may need a 7 billion dollar emergency loan just to keep the state running and this moron does not understand that things have changed finacially? Even if we try to forget that this is for the criminals and not for our struggling productive citizens.....If we have no money...we have NO money.
Posted by Everett on October 7, 2008 at 7:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So, we have a big time liberal federal judge appointing a law professor, who has no experience I know of to qualify him for this job, to run a new bureaucracy to build prison hospitals. Next the appointed law professor hires big time liberal San Francisco lawyer James Brosnahan to argue his case before the liberal federal judge. The goal? To force the state to fund this charade.
I thought incest was against the law. Guess not.
This is nothing other than the judiciary becoming the dominant branch of government. The arrogance of some liberal federal judges knows no bounds, constitutional or otherwise.
It's so bad that even our former Governor Moonbeam-turned-Attorney-General is opposed. Maybe that's just for show so he can appeal to the voters when he runs for governor again.
The public has no chance. This farce makes the political show trials in the Soviet Union look like models of fairness.
Posted by doesntgetit on October 7, 2008 at 7:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wonder if there is a constitutional requirement to provide quality education to the children of this state. That $8 billion can go a long way. I believe if would enhance education for more than just 1500 (x7) students. Just hearing about just how much education budget was cut, and that state is required to pay such a huge amount makes me wonder if there is common sense in the government. The other day, the governor indicated that the state would need to borrow $7 billion dollar to operate. Where would this $8 billion come from? I just don't get it.
Posted by keepin_it_real on October 7, 2008 at 7:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
doesntgetit,
That is the billion dollar question. Any answers, any one?
Posted by keepermel on October 7, 2008 at 8:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Keepin-it-real....out of my children's mouths and out of their minds (education) and out of their bodies (medical)....oh wait I have to pay for all of that! and I can't get a loan to save my life....or my kids obviously. Well I guess I do not pay for the education per say...although I would love to put them in private school so they could get a good education, but I can't afford it. I can't spend money I do not have. I guess our government lives by different rules! And if I do not pay for their medical I can not take care of them properly when they get sick. So I have to BUDGET my money and go without when I need to pay for those necessities.
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 8:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Not only is MediCare not making their payments to doctors so seniors are being refused services, but Arnold also allowed a line item void to exclude a $350 annual rebate to low income seniors in an attempt to save money...yet they can afford to build this place?
Why do we continue to give state of the art health care to criminals and throw our parents and grandparents out in the streets? The people who worked their butts off to build this nation and then we baby those who tear our nation down...it's completely mind blowing. Political correctness is killing the US.
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 8:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Is it just me or is this Kelso guy taking his scope of authority way too far?
I'm guessing he lives in California too, right?
How is it okay to force the stage to pay $250M with money that it doesn't have? Is Kelso employed by the state? Who manages & directs him?
This is a mess! Schools don't have what they need and teachers are sorely underpaid, yet we have to come up with $8 billion for prison hospitals.
Nice, real nice.
Posted by Nosmo_King on October 7, 2008 at 8:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
thanks JayRme, I wiki'd uber alles.. I thought it appropriate for the time were in.
Posted by Thinkbeforeyoupost on October 7, 2008 at 8:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Everybody is complaining about liberal judges. Well what do you think Prop 8 is all about? These same judges have told the people that their minds, views, and votes don't matter. Prop 22 was passed by the vote of the people, and yet afterwards the same judges have said that the people don't matter, law is what counts. Don't the people make the law? THIS IS WHAT PROP. 8 IS ALL ABOUT!!!! Telling the judges that we make the rules, not them! The Gay community has made prop. 8 out to be something it isn't. If they want the right to have their partnerships legal and binding, and to receive the same benefits as a married couple, fine. Draw up a bill and put it through the process. But don't use the judges to overwrite the peoples will. Vote yes on prop. 8 and tell these judges that they don't rule!
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 9:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thinkbeforeyoupost, in the state of CA, same sex couples already have the right to have civil unions and to share health care benefits. Prop. 8 as far as I understand only gives the right to actually "marry".
These are also the same judges who overturned Prop 187 and the one to legalize MJ. It almost makes me wonder why we even vote when judges are put in positions to force their views on the people. What is the point of being "ruled by the people" if the people's say is just overruled?
Of course, now we are going to hear about checks and balances...where are the checks & balances when things are being removed from seniors? Who is speaking up on their behalf to say it's NOT OK to take from them?? Who is speaking up for the people to say we don't want money taken from the schools and spent on high tech facilties for convicts? Why do we get no say in this...it's the money coming from OUR pay checks each week!
Posted by Thinkbeforeyoupost on October 7, 2008 at 9:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hotwildflower; Absolutly correct. This is why we must send them a message, Yes on 8!!
JayRemE; Out of the mouth of babes:)
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Are these judges appointed or voted in?
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
appointed...that is the sad part, and I believe the appointment is for life.
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 9:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hello! This article is not about proposition 8!
But if it were...NO on 8!
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You know, my issue with this article isn't even the "not in my backyard", I can totally see the benefit of this place being built and the jobs it could create. My problem with it is the amount of money it is going to cost when we already don't have the money for it. You know the money will be taken from somewhere else that really needs it and why should we have to build a place like this for these types of people? Why do we have to make them so comfortable? They are in there because they have done horrible things and tortured families and subjected to many people to such pain and we are worried about THEIR safety and well being? Make prison a terrible place to be and make it so bad that they NEVER want to go back. Make them work their fingers to the bone and long for a day when they can be free and NEVER even think of commiting another crime and ending up back in there. The way it is now, these criminals are treated better than out own soldiers...how is that ok with anyone???
Posted by keepermel on October 7, 2008 at 9:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So it seems that only if you disagree with the judges oppinion does it seem to be a problem to people. Everyone should be upset ANYTIME the judge descides to over rule the people. Prop 8 just happens to have alot of loud people behind it so very few people seem to care about the judges overstep. Now if we were all as loud as them we could really make some things happen. "WE THE PEOPLE" need to take back the athourtiy our constitution gave us.
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 9:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
don't worry, jayreme...this issue won't be going away. You'll have a chance to vote on it next time around and a few more times to follow, I'm sure.
"Out of the mouth of babes, comes the truth"
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 9:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Which type of prisoners would be housed at these facilities?
I've heard that the criminally insane and terminally ill prisoners. Or prisoners that require constant medical attention. Is that correct?
Where are the insane housed now?
How are the medical needs of the terminally ill met now?
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I believe it would house all of the above. How are they currently house? I don't know, but I am sure this would be a wonderful upgrade from their current situation.
I do know that the state of CA spent more than 3 million dollars on cancer care for a member of the Manson Family...please tell me why we would spend 3 million dollars for cancer care when someone is serving a life sentence? We are extending our financial responsibility to house them, giving them life saving care that remember, many average citizens have a hard time affording, only for this person to die. It's a waste of tax payer money!! I firmly believe a person in this position only requires inexpensive pain medication to avoid cruel and unsual punishment. We should not be extending their life.
Imagine what $3 million dollars would mean to a school, to an abused woman's shelter, in food to homeless and hungry families...I can think of 3 million better ways to spend that money than on ONE single person serving a life sentence...that is one person, how much are we spending on them as a whole?
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 9:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Is there a way to build the prison hospitals at a lower cost? I mean, do they have to be "state of the art?" Or can they be fully functioning hospitals that meet minimum standards?
And how about the state partnering with universities that have medical programs to make these teaching hospitals? Or with biotechs to be able to test trial medications?
There have to be ways to cut down on some costs.
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 9:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
That would be common sense, Bea...but we already know those who hold the purse strings lack common sense.
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 9:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
hotwildflower - I hear you about the Manson family member with cancer. And the thing is that her lawyer and family were trying to get her released so that she could die at home.
Maybe when lifers are diagnosed with a terminal illness they should be released to their families. So that they could pick up the costs of care.
I should run for something...
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 9:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You should run for something. I'll help you...as long as they don't dig up any dirt on me!
Posted by keepermel on October 7, 2008 at 9:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
BeaHappi...how about we make their families responsible for the cost anyway. How come the ones that take and take from our society get the most? Myabe if some families were made to flip the bill for their own, they may do more to help deter these people from doing more crime. I mean the way things are going...it would make since for someone with no insurance who gets told they have cancer to go and break the law....just to save their own lives. If we keep rewarding crime...we will get more crime.
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 10:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You know if a senior is put in a state run long term care facility, when they die, the state is able to take all of their assets (home) to recover the money spent to care for them.
How is that ok when we GIVE FREE health care to inmates who have ruined our society?
I have to disagree with releasing terminally ill to their families. They are locked up for a reason, just because they are diagnosed with a disease that will kill them only means they have NOTHING left to live for and may be even more dangerous. Keep them locked up, give them pain meds to put them to sleep forever...and I am all for billing their families for the cost of these meds and whatever else would lower crime rates.
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
hotwildflower...good points about releasing the terminally ill. There could always be one of those "I'm cured - it's a miracle!" and then where would we be?
Okay, so maybe release those at death's door...seriously, not just knocking at it but with one foot over the threshold.
My family is covered under my medical insurance. So if my husband commits a crime, and I'm stupid enough to stay married to him, why not continue medical coverage through my policy? Why should the state (i.e. me and my fellow taxpayers) have to pick up the costs?
Meanwhile...senior citizens have to practically bankrupt themselves to get the care that they need.
Sometimes I think that our government is learning impaired!
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
An issue I may have with charging the family is there are many cases, especially with these criminally ill where the spouse is completely unaware. Theodore Frank, who is well known here in Ventura County was married at the time of his crime, his wife had no idea. Then there are people more infamous such as the BTK Killer, he was married with children...they had no idea. I don't think it is fair to hold a wife and children accountable and made to suffer because of some sick individual. Again, they should simply be given meds to hold them over while they die naturally without being given life saving treatment.
Posted by keepermel on October 7, 2008 at 10:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
hotwildfire...you do have a point. I would think that giving the family the choice then would be a good option. They can pay for treatment, or be given the ability to sign off on recieving care. If the family declines to pay, then the minimal should be done. Then the family would have some say in sending a message to the criminal...seeing as how alot of violent criminals are in there for doing things against their own family.
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 10:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
keepermel...nice compromise! I like it...I feel our plan coming together.
When do you all want to head up to Sacramento to present our plan?
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Due to the cost of gas, maybe we can create a user friendly, fool proof powerpoint presentation. Make sure the pictures are simple enough to understand and no big words.
Posted by keepermel on October 7, 2008 at 10:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I can get my 11 year old son right on that....wait, does anyone have a 5 year old?
Posted by cslaurie on October 7, 2008 at 10:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
CONTEMPT. I have nothing but contempt for that court. How possibly did we allow our freedoms to be taken away like this. Talk about States Rights, is it time for another lesson about States Rights. Last time they were lucky....
Posted by NowHearThis on October 7, 2008 at 10:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What you people don't get is that what you sow, is what you reap!
This Federal District Court Judge Thelton Henderson is an activist liberal judge appointed by a liberal president named Jimmy Carter.
A few facts about Judge Henderson:
• He is a black leftist-liberal activist judge
• he served as director of a legal aid center in East Palo Alto, California; translation, Community Organizer that helps scofflaws beat the system
• At Stanford Law, he established the minority recruiting program and helped diversify the student body; translation: affirmative action
• In 1982 Henderson overturned the conviction of Johnny Spain, the only member of The San Quentin Six convicted of murder for the deaths of three California Correctional Peace Officers and two inmates in a riot and escape attempt lead by Black Panther Party member and Black Guerilla Family founder George Jackson.
• In a 1997 decision, he struck down Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action California initiative, as unconstitutional. He was criticized by many supporters of Proposition 209, and the next year a three-judge Court of Appeals panel overturned his decision.
And the list of this pro-minority, pro-prisoner and anti-law abiding citizen judge goes on and on.
You see all you liberals, you're happy to support guys like Barack Obama. But when Obama appoints more liberal activist judges to the federal bench, like Carter and Clinton did, this is what you get, another prison in your back yard, through judicial activism. You deserve what you get!
And, for the conservative GOP members out there: you don't stand up to the liberal onslaught on this country enough. Get out and spread the word!
Ha Ha you stupid fools!
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Ha Ha you stupid fools!"
...well the joke's kind of on all of us, right? Liberal or conservative, we all live in the same state.
Why are the judges appointed and not voted in? Sorry, state and federal government class was a long, long time ago for me!
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nowhearthis, if I didn't know better, I would almost think you were describing Obama with his community organizing and ACORN. If this is what a judge can accomplish, imagine what a person with these ideas can do in the White House.
Posted by NowHearThis on October 7, 2008 at 11:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
People; maybe it's time to brush up on your civic and learn how your gov't works, ('er doesn't work).
And hotwildflower, "you betcha, now doggone it, let's get to work to prevent Obama from ruining this country even more."
Posted by NavalAviator on October 7, 2008 at 11:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Governor Moonbeam again, oh carp!
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 12:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
But if the judges are appointed by a president, it seems that they would be tainted by the political process.
Bass-ackwards!
Posted by keem_s on October 7, 2008 at 12:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Aren't liberals wonderful? Why hasn't jw blamed this on Bush/McCain yet? What a slacker.
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 12:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think JW is out today at a William Ayers rally.
Or maybe he is seeking forgiveness from Rev. Wright
Or maybe getting a loan from Franklin Raines
Oh silly me, he's probably setting his TiVo so he can record and watch and rewatch tonight's debate.
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 1:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/...
Yup, this is where Obama got his start.
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 1:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
hotwildflower...so guilty by (prior)association?
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
YES! If the association was with terrorists or terrorist types. Of course! And what constitutes prior? If he severed his ties once the associatation was made public?
ACORN is where he started, these are his core values, he got his start in public office in the living room of this Ayers person, he may have been 8 when the bombings occured, but I can assure you...I am NOT running for public office and would be very scared to associate with someone I KNEW bombed our country and if my pastor was spreading a hateful message you can rest assured that I would be looking for another church at the first mention of the hateful message not wait until it is brought to light.
He may be charming and give people "hope" but no thanks...He scares the holy heck out of me!
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 2:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What about the conservative religious zealots who bomb abortion clinics because they don't support a woman's right to choose? Aren't they also terrorist in their activities?
I'm sure that both candidates have associations with controversial groups. McCain's campaign manager was paid by Freddie Mac up through late August.
I'm more afraid of mentally unstable John McCain dying in office and leaving us with Governor Palin as our president.
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 2:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What lies will ANY politician tell to get elected?
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 2:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
JayRemE...wait a minute Jay...we don't know anything about Nibbles. Is he married? Straight? Gay? Conservative? Liberal?
For the war? Against the war?
So many questions...so little time! :~)
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 2:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Until McCain or Palin are linked to those bombing abortion clinics, I am far less scared of them in the terrorist aspect of it all.
By the way, Obama was the #2 highest compensated by Fannie Mae last year, so I think it's a push on that issue.
I don't believe McCain is as old and fragile as people would like to believe. He has had skin cancer, been treated and moved on...it's skin cancer...how many people have had skin cancer and lived very long healthy lives?
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 3:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Discredited Republican voter-suppression guru Ken Blackwell is attacking Barack Obama with naked lies about his supposed connection to ACORN.
• Fact: Barack was never an ACORN community organizer.
• Fact: Barack was never an ACORN trainer and never worked for ACORN in any other capacity.
• Fact: ACORN was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive Barack ran in 1992.
In his capacity as an attorney, Barack represented ACORN in a successful lawsuit alongside the U.S. Department of Justice against the state of Illinois to force state compliance with a federal voting access law. For his work helping enforce the law, called “Motor Voter,” Barack received the IVI-IPO Legal Eagle Award in 1995.
Ken Blackwell is best known today for disenfranchising Democratic voters in his dual role as Ohio Secretary of State and chair of George Bush’s Ohio campaign in 2004. To see him shed crocodile tears for the integrity of the vote while making accusations about Barack and ACORN with absolutely no basis in fact is disturbing."
Regarding John McCain and skin cancer...my father-in-law had skin cancer surgery two times and both times he was successfully treated. When he was 75 it came back again, and spread throughout his body. This is what he died from last year.
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 3:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BTW - Barack was 8 years old when those bombings took place and has loose ties to Wyers at best.
Posted by hotwildflower on October 7, 2008 at 3:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I already acknowledged that he was 8 when it happened, but that doesn't mean he was ignorant to what a terrorist was in his 30's - 40's.
I am 34 and if I met someone I knew had bombed anything in the US you better believe I would be high tailing it away from that person, not allowing them to throw fund raising parties for me.
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 3:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
When did Ayers throw a fundraising party for Obama?
Posted by BeaHappi on October 7, 2008 at 4:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
hotwildflower...our back and forth banter made me think of the cartoon with Ralph (the wolf) and Sam (the sheep dog). How they were friends but once they were on the clock they battled it out.
Oh, what in the world will we debate about after this election is over? I think we agree on almost everything else! :~)
Posted by THESILKY1 on October 7, 2008 at 5:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Not bad people glad to see all are talking.
Today I want to talk about Mr Kelso and his spending habits with your tax dollars.
Mr Kelso has purchased and has hired Maxor as a consultant to the tune of 2.8 Million Dollars. The prescription Drug Program that was purchased for pharmacies blows and blows badly. Read the link from the using employee at CMC Prison.
cphcs.ca.gov/docs/responses/PR_20080329_i1_Smalling.pdf
Then there is the DGS Master Bulk Drug Contract that Mr Kelso and his staff thumb their noses at. This is mandatory State Contract for Purchasing medications, but Kelso doesn't care he says it does not apply to the Receivership and he is exempt from the State Purchasing Policies. Besides he is saving millions on paper,or is he?
www.bsa.ca.gov/pdfs/reports/2007-501.pdf
How long is the lack of Fiscal Oversight going to continue, when it comes to blowing our Tax Dollars by Mr Kelso and his personal crusade to brake the State's Bank.
The Silky....
Posted by THESILKY1 on October 7, 2008 at 5:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
By the way,
For those of you, that want to know, Mr Kelso is being paid for by your tax dollars, a State employee hiding under the guise of a Receivership Corp.
BIGGGG Business Runnning your Government, Sounds
about right..........
The Silk.............
Posted by THESILKY1 on October 7, 2008 at 6:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Never mind 980 million, to take care of our children, who are sick and dying.
Let's give 8 Billion to our prisons, so Johnny on Death Row can get his teeth cleaned.
This is totally half ----- backwards.
The Silk....
Posted by keepermel on October 9, 2008 at 6:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is like paying your kids alouance before you pay your morgage! Your spoiled brat kid will be happy, but you will not have a house to live in. What is this idiot Kelso thinking, or this judge for that matter?!?! You can't get blood from a turnip. And lets see...10,500 prisoners/criminals/drain on our society, are worth more than keeping our state running with it's basic needs. Again the monkies are running the zoo. More people who can not vote....as most criminals have lost the right....are getting more attention then those of us that can vote. WE THE PEOPLE need to start being louder than these cry babies that are gettting all of the attention and money.
Posted by mwilson on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The fact that the prison health care system is shot and failing to care properly for inmates should not be pitted against the needs of the homeless elderly and mentally ill. The issue is not no health care for the one verses health care for the other. I think putting the lack of health care for both on a competitive basis ill serves the issue. We know there is plenty of waste, misappropriation, and unfair tax structure and budget appropriations to go around; and that all existed long before this current budget and this good solution to the lousy health care for prisoners, a solution that has taken an awful long time to get going. Proper health care for all is the answer and there seems to be plenty for some and nothing for others. Thank you for decrying this major loss to the homeless elderly and mentally ill. Now that we have improved much needed health care for one, destroying the other is obviously not the answer.
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
- Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
- Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
- Threats, whether obvious or veiled.
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
There are 61 comments to this article.
Comments are found beneath the Yahoo! ad below.