Government belongs to us - by Judge Jim Gray

IT’S A GRAY AREA: Government belongs to us - by Judge Jim Gray 11/09/08

No matter how you approach the issue, when all is said and done, it’s our government, and if it is not working, it is our own fault. In today’s large and complicated world, that is a difficult mantra to accept — but we are “the People” mentioned in our Constitution, and there is no alternative than to accept this as our ultimate responsibility in our democratic republic. Fortunately, the good news is that if we persist, we will often be successful in achieving results.

In that regard, let me tell you a story. As some of you may recall, on Oct. 14, 2007, this column addressed the fact that when a person donated a minimum of $5,000 to the California Highway Patrol’s 11-99 Foundation, the donor was given both a license plate frame and an identification card about his or her membership — that (coincidentally) could be placed next to that person’s driver’s license.

Of course, the strong implication by being sent these items was that the donor would receive favorable treatment from the CHP out on the state’s highways. And I cited in the column some occasions in which that favorable treatment had actually been given.

After the column was published, I sent a copy of it to Commissioner Mike Brown of the CHP, along with a handwritten letter requesting him to investigate the situation, and hopefully cause the 11-99 Foundation to discontinue this practice. The reason for that request, of course, was that our system of justice in traffic court and everywhere else should be entirely free from even the appearance of any favoritism whatsoever.

I received no response to my letter. So a few months later in another column I reported to you that I had not received a response from Brown, and then sent him a second letter, this time accompanied by a copy of both of the columns. Again my letter was met only by silence.

But about four months thereafter I learned that the CHP had a new commissioner named Joe Farrow, so I sent a letter to him, along with an explanation of my request and a copy of both prior columns. Within three weeks, I received a telephone call from his secretary inviting me to have lunch with the new commissioner.

We had that lunch Oct. 21, and at that time Farrow told me he had personally investigated the matter, and concluded that there could indeed be the perception of favoritism in this area. So he had taken action in two ways.

First, he had issued a strong statement to all of his troops that they were not to be influenced by 11-99 Foundation membership in exercising their sound discretion about whether to issue traffic citations or anything else.

Second, he had met with the officials of the 11-99 Foundation and was successful in obtaining their promise to cease the distribution of the license plate frames and identification cards by this coming January. In addition, he had also instigated a movement to recall the license plate frames and ID cards that have already been issued.

This is government at its best, and that was the laudatory message I gave to Farrow. Responsive, responsible, professional and based upon integrity.

I also passed along to the commissioner that in my opinion the CHP was the most professional law enforcement agency in the state, and that I had initiated my request for change so that this deserved stellar reputation would not in any way be tarnished.

In addition, I told him that I felt so strongly about the goals of the 11-99 Foundation, which is to provide support for the widows and orphans of fallen CHP officers, that I wanted to make a donation to it on the spot. And I did, and was proud to do so.

Why am I writing about this experience? Because it demonstrates the fact that we can and do have an influence in our government — at all levels. In fact, if we are persistent, there is little that we cannot accomplish, at least in the long run.

Why? Because in government, like many other situations in life, familiarity does not breed contempt; it breeds access. Another way of saying this is that government is a “contact sport.” So all of us should make advocacy a regular part of our everyday lives. Our form of government depends upon it.

And in that regard, and as we have seen, persistence frequently pays off. Many elected officials have told me that when they receive individually written letters, they attach great significance and weight to them. In fact, they actually have a formula that for every personalized letter they receive, they feel that at least 35 other people in their district probably have the same views. So don’t be bashful about writing those letters.

Of course, your letters will have a great deal more chance of influencing elected officials if you actually can vote for those same officials. This means that a letter you send to your own member of Congress will be much more likely to have influence than a letter you might send to another member outside of your district. In sending that letter you will probably be wasting both your time and postage stamp.

But to take this a step further, if you can get together a group of 10 to 15 voters or more in your elected official’s district who are united and vocal about a certain issue, that would probably be so influential that the odds are overwhelming that the elected officials not only would respond to you, but they would even actually meet with you on the subject at a place of your choosing.

So that is the way we can obtain government at its best. Relationships are power and, whatever your issues are, you can and should turn your passions into that power. Why? Because if we do not have government at its best, we only have ourselves to blame.

James P. Gray is a Judge of the Superior Court in California, the author of Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It - A Judicial Indictment of the War on Drugs (Temple University Press, 2001) and Wearing The Robe - The Art And Responsibilities of Judging In Today's Courts, has a blog at http://judgejamesgray.blogspot.com/. http://www.judgejimgray.com, and can be contacted at www.judgejimgray.com.

LET’S AGAIN PUT OUT THE WELCOME MAT FOR TOURISTS - by Judge Jim Gray

LET’S AGAIN PUT OUT THE WELCOME MAT FOR TOURISTS (23) - by Judge Jim Gray 12/23/07


  Like you, I love and am proud of our country, and I would like to show it off to more people from around the world. In my view, doing this would strongly promote better relations between our country and the rest of the world, and would also give us some sizeable economic benefits.


  Nowhere in the world is found more interesting or beautiful places than in our land. Cities like Boston, New York, Seattle, San Francisco and many in Southern California take a back seat to no other places in interest and beauty, and I would match the view in Yosemite Valley against any other in the world for overwhelming majesty and grandeur.


  But according to our own Department of Commerce statistics, we are the only major country in the world today that is experiencing a decrease in tourism. That is true for two reasons. The first is our response to the threat of terrorism, and the second is our lack of organization and coordination in promoting tourism to our country.  


  Unfortunately, our preoccupation with the perceived threat of terrorism has kept our tourist alert stages consistently at orange – which is the second-highest level. And since the color-coded program was initiated after 9/11, it has never been dropped below stage yellow, which is an “elevated” rate. It is understandable that no bureaucrat wants to be the one who lets the next terrorists into our country, but there are much better ways of dealing with that problem.


  As a result of these reasons, it now takes an average of 45 to 60 days almost anywhere in the world just for a potential tourist to process a visa application to travel to our country. Therefore, today many business and leisure travelers are simply unwilling to put up with what they view as the inconvenience and even indignity of high rejection rates, long lines, high fees and prolonged waits for the issuance of a visa.


  And this is not just an Arab or Muslim issue. For example, the number of tourists from Japan fell from 5 million in 2000 to only 3.6 million in 2006. We even saw 10 percent fewer tourists coming here from Great Britain during the same period of time, and in many ways they are our closest allies. Furthermore, all of this is occurring in spite of the weakness of our dollar in comparison to the Japanese yen and the British pound.


  Furthermore, when those tourists who do come here actually reach our shores, they are met with ridiculously long lines, delays, hassles and even humiliations while going through the Customs process at our airports. The worst of our airports in my experience is Miami, where there are days in which almost everyone misses their connecting flights because of the delays. This, of course, means further long lines to obtain new tickets, being forced to go through the screening process all over again, and additional significant delays in waiting for the next flight, if there is one. From a traveler’s standpoint, who needs it?


  So it is hard for a Libertarian to say this, but what we really need is a new federal agency to promote tourism in the United States, and to streamline the admission process to our country. We are the only advanced country in the world that dies not have such an agency.  


In fact, Jamaica is more organized and spends more money internationally promoting tourism to their country than we do to ours. This is silly, particularly where one considers that our 17 percent decrease in tourism since 9/11 has cost us $94 billion in lost tourist spending, about 200,000 jobs and $16 billion in lost tax revenues.


  What should this new agency do in addition to promoting the wonderful tourist destinations in our country to people around the world? One thing would be to develop a new identification system at our ports of entry for frequent travelers. Another would be to encourage our airline industry to establish a low-cost stand-by fare for students and seniors – or for everybody for that matter. And it could also promote a system in which people in cities, as well as in more rural areas, could rent out their spare bedrooms to tourists for a few nights.  


The term Bed and Breakfast has evolved into one that generally describes upper-end lodging with canopies over the beds and virtual gourmet breakfasts. But when I was younger I stayed in Germany and Austria in spare bedrooms with families that simply had posted signs saying “Zimmer Frei,” or room available, on the streets outside their homes. Then for a modest amount of money I had a clean and comfortable room, a good basic breakfast, and all the family I could enjoy. Bringing in an organized system like that would bring many diplomatic and economic blessings upon our great country.


  Many people around the world have seen pictures of our country in movies, books, magazines, and on the Internet, and have developed an innate desire to see it for themselves. For example, Chinese tourism is exploding, and the Chinese government is close to completely lifting a ban on travel to the U.S. At this point it would make a great deal of sense for us to ease our entry restrictions for Chinese tourists as well.  


Yes, the tourists will be anxious to visit Disneyland. But they will also want to spend their time and new wealth at places like Rodeo Drive, Fashion Island and South Coast Plaza. They want to purchase clothing and jewelry here because they are concerned about the fake products in Asia. And they also will be anxious to visit our smaller venues like the Newport Sports Museum or the Huntington Beach International Surfing Museum.  


About 34 million Chinese traveled overseas in 2006, and that is projected to increase by 10 percent per year. But less than two percent of those Chinese tourists came to our country. This is particularly unsatisfactory since the word “America” in many Chinese dialects literally means “beautiful country.” Unfortunately, we are missing out for just about every reason imaginable.  


  So it is time for us to organize our tourist programs and to change those numbers. Yes there are risks that some people might overstay their visas or cause some other form of trouble. But those risks can be controlled and reduced with appropriate attention to them without closing off the beauty of our country to good, enthusiastic and increasingly wealthy tourists.


  Today we have almost no organization or coordination in the area of international tourism, and we are paying the price. In fact we are so disorganized that our Departments of State and of Homeland Security recently promulgated a tourism video that mistakenly encouraged tourists to visit the Canadian side of the Niagara Falls. So who’s in charge here? Maybe no one. We can, and we must, do better than that.


  (BTW: To those of my faith, I wish you a Merry Christmas. And for those of different beliefs, I wish you the true Spirit of Christmas. All of the world’s great religions, even including the atheistic Humanism, have the same values, which include a desire for peace among men and women, and a better, more meaningful and giving life for oneself and one’s children. In my view, those values are exemplified by the Spirit of Christmas. So go ahead, wish people you meet a Merry Christmas and Spirit of Christmas. It is okay, and if some people take offense, that is their problem. Merry Christmas!)

James P. Gray is a Judge of the Superior Court in California, the author of Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It - A Judicial Indictment of the War on Drugs (Temple University Press, 2001) and Wearing The Robe - The Art And Responsibilities of Judging In Today's Courts, has a blog at http://judgejamesgray.blogspot.com/. http://www.judgejimgray.com, and can be contacted at www.judgejimgray.com.

“CHARITY BOLSTERS CHP FAVORITISM” by Judge Jim Gray

“CHARITY BOLSTERS CHP FAVORITISM” - by Judge Jim Gray 10/18/07

  Recently a good friend of mine who lives in Northern California bought a new, expensive and fast car. When his neighbor, who has a similar type of car, noticed it he told my friend that he would now certainly want to make a $5,000 contribution to the California Highway Patrol’s 11-99 Foundation. “Why was that?” asked my friend. “Because that is like buying insurance against being cited by the CHP for speeding and other traffic violations. It has worked form me, my son and numbers of my friends,” was the answer.


  So what is the CHP 11-99 Foundation? This charitable organization receives contributions from the public and uses them to provide financial support for widows and orphans of deceased CHP officers, scholarships for deserving dependents, and similar worthwhile activities. Donations in any amount are accepted with appreciation. But, according to the nice lady at the foundation who responded to my call and according to the brochure she sent to me, those who donate $5,000 or more receive an engraved license plate frame that says “Member, 11-99 Foundation” on it, and they also receive a pocket-sized wallet complete with a card with the donor’s name and lifetime identification number engraved in relief upon it.


  Now there is absolutely no question that the family members of deceased officers of this great and professional law enforcement organization should be supported, and a foundation of this kind is a perfectly appropriate vehicle to accomplish that goal. But the furnishing of a license plate frame that will allow all law enforcement officers to see that the automobile owner supports their “families in need,” or a wallet that places proof of membership in this organization conspicuously close to that person’s driver’s license will at best be misunderstood by the public. And at worst they will appear to be what my friend’s neighbor said they are: an invitation for favoritism in the criminal justice system for people who donate to this cause.


  To be honest, I do not know how effective those invitations are in obtaining favorable treatment from law enforcement officers on our streets and highways. I myself have asked several CHP officers if it makes any difference to them, and they have consistently denied it. But even the thought that these objects might work in even a few cases, or even appear to work, is enough to require that this part of this otherwise worthwhile program be disbanded.


  As a practical matter, we will never run out of worthy causes for which donors could be considered for favorable treatment from government agencies. If we follow this lead, soon the California Franchise Tax Board could be giving favorable interpretations on close tax questions to donors who support the agents’ children’s scholarship funds, or the county board of supervisors could be giving the “benefit of the doubt” and approve land development projects for those who donate to the supervisors’ “pet charities.”  


  You might not be aware that judges are ethically prohibited from informing law enforcement officers about our status under circumstances in which that knowledge might affect the officers’ decisions about issuing us a traffic or other citation. That was not always so, to the degree that when I first became a judge back in 1983 I was offered a wallet with a badge right across from where I carried my driver’s license. (Actually some people might feel that this might hurt us more than help.)  


But times and morays have changed, and I believe that restrictions of this kind are fully appropriate, and an overwhelming majority of judges understand and embrace those restrictions. But should not the same standards be applied to supporters of even such worthwhile programs as the 11-99 Foundation?


Now I agree that sometimes it is hard to draw the line. For example, I have a small “organ donor” sticker pasted right on the front of my driver’s license. Does this mean that under certain “close call” circumstances I might be treated with more deference by a police officer than someone without it? Probably not, but maybe so. I know that there is a socially justifiable reason for that sticker to be there, and I never really focused upon this issue until I began thinking about this column. In addition, I really think that the chances that this sticker would even be noticed by an officer much less be the cause of any special favoritism would be miniscule, but should I take the sticker off just to be sure? No, it is still there.


  But seemingly there is no reason for the CHP to provide license plate frames or these particular wallets except to provide the opportunity for favorable treatment. Of course this is a legitimate organization commendably addressing a community need. Furthermore, the CHP officers I have encountered appear to be fine individuals who routinely provide a difficult and much-needed community service, often without sufficient appreciation by the public they serve. But at the end of the day, no matter how fine the organization, improper influence is just that: improper. 


Many times in this column we have discussed things that are complicated and difficult to change. But here we have a specific area of ostensible inappropriate influence peddling that can be fixed right now. Accordingly, I request each of you to join me in doing whatever we can to cause the following three results to be realized:  


1. The practice by the CHP’s 11-99 Foundation of providing any form of object that can be used to call the attention of law enforcement officers to the identity of donors to this worthwhile cause be immediately curtailed;

2. Officials at the highest levels of the California Highway Patrol be encouraged to instruct all of their officers that they are not in any way to be affected by the presence of such information if it is encountered; and, 

3. Those people who are presently carrying wallets with those identification cards and/or have those license plate frames on their cars be encouraged as a matter of personal integrity to dispose of them.


Some unintended consequences of discussing a program like this publicly could be that by calling attention to it we could actually start a “cottage industry” of people who would steal the license plate frames and sell them to others who would hope to benefit from some special treatment. Other results could be that people who did not otherwise know about the program now would make the requisite contributions so that they too might receive this special treatment. And finally, it is possible that some members of the CHP who might view this article will see it as another example of the public’s lack of appreciation of the invaluable services they provide, sometimes at the risk of harm, or worse. I hope not to be the cause of any of those results.


But equal justice under the law cannot exist in a climate that confirms some people’s already jaded view that government can be bought. As such, people of good will should do everything they reasonably can to help do away with even the hint that any influence peddling is occurring today in any fashion with the California Highway Patrol.

James P. Gray is a Judge of the Superior Court in California, the author of Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It - A Judicial Indictment of the War on Drugs (Temple University Press, 2001) and Wearing The Robe - The Art And Responsibilities of Judging In Today's Courts, has a blog at http://judgejamesgray.blogspot.com/. http://www.judgejimgray.com, and can be contacted at www.judgejimgray.com.