The California Public Safety Committee voted this morning to ban spanking in California. On a party-line vote, 5-2, lawmakers approved AB 2943 by Assemblywoman Sally Lieber. The bill bans any form of corporal punishment, including spanking a child with “a stick, a rod, or a switch.”  Last session Assemblywoman Lieber attempted to pass another identical bill, AB 755, but the bill was voted down in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

“It’s shameful that a lawmaker wants to ban parents from lovingly disciplining their children,” stated Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Family Impact. “Many parents use a wooden spoon or a similar instrument to discipline a disobedient child because they don’t want to use their hand, an instrument of love.”

CRFI’s legislative liaison Meredith Turney testified against the bill in the committee hearing and stated, “This bill goes much further than preventing abuse and intrudes in the loving discipline parents use to raise healthy children. AB 2943 equates kicking, cutting or burning a child with a responsible spanking. The millions of responsible parents who lovingly discipline their children would never engage in such abusive behavior as burning or cutting their children.”

“Lawmakers claim that they want to prevent abuse against children,” continued England. “But spanking a child is meant to protect disobedient children from harm. By teaching children to obey parents, who understand how to protect their children from harm, children will be prevented from naively harming themselves. If I spank my disobedient child to prevent them from running in front of a car, I am protecting them from real harm.”

Perhaps the most shocking revelation at the hearing was that the California Teacher’s Association was one of the two witnesses who testified in support of the spanking ban. According to the CTA, “The use of physical punishment teaches children that violence/physical force is an acceptable method to resolve differences. We need to stop the cycle of violence and AB 2943 will help make that happen.”

The CTA has already publicly opposed CRFI’s bills to prevent homosexual indoctrination in public schools and require parental notification when sexual topics are discussed in the classroom. The CTA has publicly supported communist teachers in public schools and now favors making parents who spank criminals.

“It is shocking and outrageous that the largest teachers’ union in the state wants to intrude into our homes and tell us how to raise our children,” stated England. “Not content with simply indoctrinating students with communism and homosexuality, the union now wants to prevent parents from disciplining their children.”

“We often hear in the legislature that schools need more diversity training to prevent bullying, harassment and violence,” stated Turney. “But the CTA and lawmakers want to ban the most effective deterrent to a child’s misbehavior—loving discipline from a concerned parent.”

The legislature’s condescending attitude towards parents who spank was revealed in the Assembly Public Safety Committee’s analysis of AB 2943. The analysis distributed to legislators before they voted stated that the Bible sanctions corporal punishment, including beating a child with a rod. The analysis then goes on to cite the Father of the Protestant Reformation: “Martin Luther believed that parents could use extreme measures, even death, when children were disobedient. Based upon these religious authorities, many people believed that beating a child was acceptable.”

“These citations clearly reveal that lawmakers believe parents who spank are beating their children,” stated England. “They have no understanding of responsible, loving discipline.”

Although the spanking ban bill was defeated last session, we know we must remain vigilant on this bill. In a recent newspaper interview, Assemblywoman Lieber described her strategy for passing bills that the majority of Californians oppose: "Last year we started out with 95 to 100 percent of reaction being negative. Once people found out what we were trying to do with the bill, that was reduced to 85 percent negative.”

In other words, Lieber and her peers want to continually introduce such bills until they wear down the opposition. We must continue to voice our opinions or we risk losing our freedoms.

We need a groundswell of opposition to the bill in order to defeat it. Take action today!

Please visit CRFI’s Action Center web site and participate in the effort to defeat AB 2943.

Bill of the Week—AB 2567, Harvey Milk Day

AB 2567 will set aside May 22nd as 'Harvey Milk Day' for all of California. Most citizens have no idea who Mr. Milk is or why he deserves a special state-recognized holiday. In the homosexual community Harvey Milk is considered a "civil rights" leader for his work in advancing homosexual "rights" in California. A resident of the infamous Castro district in San Francisco, Milk was one of the first homosexual elected officials in America. He was killed in 1978 by a fellow San Francisco county supervisor. Considered a martyr for the homosexual movement, Milk is now a hero for the homosexual community. Under AB 2567, schools will be encouraged to participate in the state holiday by promoting Mr. Milk and homosexuality.

This is yet another example of the campaign to normalize homosexual behavior not just in schools, but in our culture. We must continue to defend our traditional values despite the effort to demolish the very values that established and sustain our nation.

AB 2567 will be heard in the Assembly Education Committee on Wednesday, April 23.

You Live in a Battleground State

California is a critical battleground state.  One-eighth of the total U.S. population lives in California.  More supreme courts and legislatures from other states look to California to make their decisions than to any other state. 

We must fight for marriage, for our children, for our schools, for our religious liberty, and for the protection of innocent life.  We must do it today or it may be too late.   

One specific way you can help fight an important battle today is by printing off, signing, and returning a Save Our Kids petition. 

The Save Our Kids campaign is CRI’s effort to overturn SB 777, the most outrageous attack on our children, our religious freedom, and our parental rights to date. 

Since SB 777 passed the California legislature last year, no child in a California public school is safe from intensive pro-homosexual indoctrination. 

SB 777 will prohibit references to “mom and dad” because it would be discriminatory against homosexual couples. Boys would be allowed to run for prom queen if it “corresponds with their gender identity.” Boys would also be allowed to enter female locker rooms and restrooms. 

CRI has until August 29th, 2008 to gather 435,000 signatures for our initiative. It is crucial that we join together and turn back this assault on our families and values.

During the SB 777 referendum, we successfully gathered over 350,000 signatures in just 70 days. With double the time, and an enthusiastic volunteer base, we are confident we will qualify our initiative for the ballot.

We challenge you to take action today!  Your joining this effort can help to make the difference. 

For more information and to print petitions, go here.

Schwarzenegger: Protecting Marriage is “Waste of Time”

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger made headlines this week by declaring to a group of Log Cabin Republicans that an attempt to amend California’s constitution to ban same-sex marriage is a “total waste of time.”

Perhaps Schwarzenegger should ask children who are robbed of having both a mother and a father if it is a waste of time. 

“Californians want marriage to be preserved for one man and one woman because tampering with this time-honored institution is a disservice to our children,” stated Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute.  “The California Marriage Protection Act deserves its day at the ballot box.  This issue is too important and far-reaching to be left to the whims of activist judges and extremist politicians.”

Currently the California Marriage Protection campaign is boxing up petitions and submitting them to the 58 county election officials.  It will be close and more petitions are needed.  At this point, every petition counts! 

If you have a protect marriage petition that you still have not returned, please send it in ASAP so it can be counted!

Mass Exodus: Californians Seeking Tax Relief

April 15 has come and gone.  This past week you likely joined many other citizens across the country in filing your annual income taxes.  

Although the deadline to pay taxes has already passed, we have yet to commemorate Tax Freedom Day. 

Tax Freedom Day is the first day of the year in which a nation as a whole has earned enough income to fund its annual tax burden.  According to The Tax Foundation, this year’s national Tax Freedom Day will arrive on April 23, 2008.  But for Californians, it won’t arrive until a week later, on April 30. 

A recent National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) policy digest report highlighted the fact that Californians are forced to shoulder an exceptionally high tax burden compared to other states and this is resulting in a mass exodus from the state:

“The latest Census Bureau data indicate that in 2005, 239,416 more Californians left the state than moved in; this was also the case in 2003 and 2004.

“The native-born outmigration flows have become so systematic that the cost to rent a U-Haul to move from Los Angeles to Boise, Idaho is $2090—or some six times more that the cost of moving in the opposite direction.

“What’s gone wrong with the Golden State? A big part of the story is a tax and regulatory culture … The cost for businesses of complying with California’s rules, regulations, and paperwork is more than twice as high as other states.  But the real growth killer is California’s steeply ‘progressive’ income tax with 10.3 percent rate applied to high-income residents — the highest in the nation outside New York City.”

“This unduly high taxation is just one factor that contributes toward California being a state that is unfriendly toward families and family values,” stated Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute.  “Our legislature needs to get back in touch with the average Californian on many levels, including their out-of-control taxing and spending habits.” 

Resource for Parents: Protect Your Child’s Health

After a recent study indicating that one in four teenage girls have a sexually transmitted infection (STI), parents are more concerned than ever to protect their children’s health. 

It is clear that abstinence until marriage is the only way to ensure adequate protection against STIs.  But how do parents instill the virtue of chastity in their teenagers in a culture where teens are constantly encouraged toward early sexual experiences? 

Concerned Parents Report is a website dedicated to reporting information and equipping parents to teach their children a chaste lifestyle and keep them safe from STIs and teenage pregnancy. 

To visit Concerned Parents Report, go here.

Propositions on the June Ballot

Vote-by-mail ballots will soon be arriving in mailboxes all across the state. There are two very important ballot initiatives Californians will consider this summer: Propositions 98 and 99. Similar to Proposition 90, the 2006 initiative that sought to protect homeowners and churches from eminent domain abuse, Proposition 98 will prevent government from taking private property and then giving it to another private party.

Unfortunately, property developers and tax revenue-hungry local governments have also placed an eminent domain measure on the ballot that is much weaker. Proposition 99 does not include protections for churches and other types of property. Voters should be aware that if both initiatives pass, Proposition 99 has a “poison pill” provision that will nullify the protections for churches include in Proposition 98. That is why it is so important that voters vote “YES” on 98 and “NO” on 99.

CRFI’s recommendation:
Proposition 98: YES
Proposition 99: NO

Coed Dorm Rooms Increasing in California Universities

There is an alarming new trend on college campuses throughout the nation: coed dorm rooms. For years, college students have been desensitized to the importance of modesty and distinctions between males and females because of coed dorms and restrooms. Now, male and female students will be allowed to share rooms in their college dorms. According to MSNBC.com, at least two dozen universities already allow coed roommates, including the California Institute of Technology, UC Riverside and Stanford University.

CA Supreme Court to Consider Lesbian Case against Christian Fertility Doctors

The California Supreme Court is considering more than one controversial homosexual case this year. In addition to deciding whether Proposition 22 is constitutional, the court will hear oral arguments on May 28th in the case of an Oceanside lesbian suing Christian fertility doctors for refusing to treat her. In 1999, lesbian Guadalupe "Lupita" Benítez was referred to the fertility doctors at North Coast Women's Care Medical Group for fertility treatment. The doctors refused to inseminate Benítez based on their Christian beliefs. A local trial court in 2004 decided that because the doctors work for a for-profit medical group, they must treat all patients—including homosexuals—according to the state’s antidiscrimination laws. After the doctors appealed the decision, a San Diego Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the doctors’ religious freedom.

“It is unconscionable to force people in the medical profession to check their beliefs at the door before entering the workplace,” stated Karen England, executive director for Capitol Resource Institute. “There is no constitutional right to fertility treatment, but there is a very specific right to live according to your religious beliefs. To protect our precious religious liberty, the California Supreme Court should decide this case in favor of the doctors.”

Monday Morning Update

You may have noticed that our Monday Morning Update has been missing from your Inbox the last two weeks. MMU is designed to inform our readers about the latest legislative news and provide simple instructions on how to impact the legislative process. The alert is typically produced during the busy parts of the legislative session. When there are no bills to take action on or we have been sending out many emails on other issues, we will sometimes miss a week so that we don’t burden our readers. When you do receive MMU, you know it is very important to take action on the targeted bills.

9th Circuit Rules in Favor of Pro-Life Pharmacists

Last week the notoriously liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals made the surprising decision to grant an injunction to stop a Washington state policy that mandated pharmacists fill all prescriptions. Under the Washington pharmacy board rule, pro-life pharmacists would be forced to fill prescriptions for birth control and morning after pills. In 2007, the state board had unanimously decided that the religious objections of pro-life pharmacists could not supersede a customer’s “right” to their prescription drugs. Pro-life pharmacists then filed a lawsuit to stop the new state regulations from taking effect.  In granting the preliminary injunction, the appeals court ruled that abortion advocates had not provided enough evidence to show how patients would be harmed by allowing pro-life pharmacists to exercise their religious beliefs. The full case will be heard in the 9th Circuit by June 3.

“California laws also create a hostile environment for pro-life pharmacists,” explained Karen England, executive director for Capitol Resource Institute. “This injunction is a victory for our constitutional right to religious freedom, especially at work. A 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in favor of pro-life pharmacists will protect religious freedoms for many pharmacists throughout our state and country.”

Bill of the Week—AB 624: Government Oversight of Private Foundations

This intrusive bill would require all private, corporate, or public foundations incorporated in California, with assets of more than $250 million, to collect ethnic and gender data on their board of directors, staff and grant recipients. These organizations would also be required to report the number of grants and percentage of grant dollars awarded to organizations “serving ethnic minority communities and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender communities.”

Promoted as a “sunshine” bill, this legislation will shame charitable organizations into giving more of their donor money to homosexuals and other “minorities.” In addition to over-taxing Californians, government now wants to tell private citizens which charitable organizations to support. Such legislation is a slippery slope: first, government “collects data” and then passes laws to force philanthropies to donate their money to government-approved groups. The inherent danger in such legislation is that it could lead to other tax-exempt organizations like churches to give part of their funding to causes they actually oppose.

Propositions on the June Ballot

There are two very important ballot initiatives Californians will consider this summer: Propositions 98 and 99. Similar to Proposition 90, the 2006 initiative that sought to protect homeowners and churches from eminent domain abuse, Proposition 98 will prevent government from taking private property and then giving it to another private party.

Unfortunately, property developers and tax revenue-hungry local governments have also placed an eminent domain measure on the ballot that is much weaker. Proposition 99 does not include protections for churches and other types of property. Voters should be aware that if both initiatives pass, Proposition 99 has a “poison pill” provision that will nullify the protections for churches include in Proposition 98. That is why it is so important that voters vote “YES” on 98 and “NO” on 99.

CRFI’s recommendation:
Proposition 98: YES
Proposition 99: NO

June 3rd Election Resources

The June 3rd Primary Election is less than two weeks away. Many voters are already voting by mail and sending in their ballots. To better assist you in deciding on ballot initiatives and voting for pro-family candidates, CRI recommends the following pro-family voter guides:

Robyn Nordell’s Election Recommendations

Robyn is a pro-family advocate in the Orange County area. Her extensive political experience and personal relationship with pro-family lawmakers makes her website one of the best California election resources on the internet.

Craig Huey’s Election Recommendations

An author, public speaker and business owner, Craig is a highly-respected conservative activist who works with churches in educating their members on political issues.

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Child Pornography Law 

True free speech had a victory at the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this week.  In the U.S. vs. Williams case, the Supreme Court agreed that federal law can prohibit providing and soliciting child pornography. 

The case revolves around Michael Williams, who participated in a public chat room and solicited child pornography.  He plead guilty on one count of promoting the behavior and one count of possessing child pornography.  Williams argued the law was unconstitutional based on his first amendment rights.  However, the Supreme Court disagreed with Williams and in a 7-2 decision upheld the federal statute that prohibits promoting and obtaining child pornography. 

“Abusing and sexually exploiting children is not free speech.  It is ludicrous that somebody would even argue abusing and exploiting children is a constitutional right,” says Karen England, executive director for Capitol Resource Institute. 

In California, legislators currently have the opportunity to protect children from being exploited on pornographic websites.  AB 2104 authored by Assemblyman Cameron Smyth protects minors from having their photos posted on pornographic websites.  The legislation came about after pictures of minors on a California water polo team appeared on homosexual pornographic websites without their knowledge.

“It is important that our lawmakers protect and preserve the safety of our children.  We need to see more support and advocacy like this, especially on the state level,” stated England.

Britain Declares Fathers “Unnecessary”

For dads in Britain, this Father’s Day may be a non-event. Earlier this week the British Parliament voted to ban fertility clinics from considering whether a child needs a father when they assist potential clients.

Under the “Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill,” clinics must consider a “need for supportive parenting,” as opposed to a traditional family setting for children. According to The Times Online, “The decisions mean that the legislation will grant the most significant extension to homosexual family rights since gay adoption was sanctioned. It will stop fertility clinics turning away lesbians and single women because their children will not have a father or male role model.”

“Marriage and the family unit are under attack,” stated Karen England, executive director for Capitol Resource Institute. “Here in California, our highest court just declared that a marriage and family can consist of two women or two men. It’s the children who will suffer because of the destruction of traditional families. Children need their mother and their father. It’s terribly sad the British government has essentially told men that they no longer need to be responsible, loving fathers who will help raise their children.”

In addition to the fertility clinic law, Parliament defeated a measure that would have restricted abortions to the first 22 weeks of pregnancy as opposed to 24 weeks. This was the first vote in 18 years on legislation relating to abortion in Britain. Members also approved legislation that allows the creation of hybrid embryos for medical research, and producing “savior siblings” to be used as tissue donors for sick children.

Memorial Day

Memorial Day is a special time of remembering those who have fought so valiantly for our country. This weekend as your family enjoys the first summer holiday, please take time to reflect on the ultimate sacrifice thousands of American soldiers have made so that we may live in freedom.

“They fell, but o'er their glorious grave
Floats free the banner of the cause they died to save.”
~Francis Marion Crawford

Mixed Messages on Homosexual Marriage in California

Last week’s newswires delivered conflicting stories about the future of marriage in California.  The state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between "a man and a woman" qualified for the November ballot, in a clear statement on voters' family values.  Yet on Wednesday, the state Supreme Court refused to stay its ruling that legalizes homosexual marriage until the election passes.  Its refusal may create trouble for newlywed homosexuals.

Over 1.1 million Californians signed petitions to qualify the marriage amendment for the state ballot, considerably more than the 694,354 signatures needed.  Their victory underscores that voters hold family values and want marriage defined in the traditional way.  This November, they can pass the California Marriage Protection Act by marking "yes" on Initiative 1298.

If passed, the amendment would overrule the Supreme Court’s ruling on homosexual marriage.  Conservative groups asked the Court to stay its ruling until after November, but it refused.  This means homosexuals can begin marrying on June 17, despite the expectation that Initiative 
1298 will reaffirm one man, one woman marriage.  Karen England, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute, called this "an example of the Supreme Court being out of touch."

California Attorney General Jerry Brown told the New York Times that a stay is unnecessary.  "Same-sex marriage is a deeply contentious issue," he said, "but in California the matter has now been resolved by the state Supreme Court."  The issue is not resolved: the people have yet to vote.  Homosexuals may wed in June, but they risk holding invalid licenses in November.

Election Recap: A Loss for Churches

On Tuesday, Californians voted on two initiatives that address eminent domain abuse.  They passed Proposition 99, which prohibits the government from taking property from one private owner and giving it to another private owner.  Voters defeated Proposition 98, which protected against eminent domain abuse, and went further in ensuring that churches were included.  Though this difference was not obvious, Proposition 99 unfortunately excludes churches from its protections.  Its passage will likely benefit developers and local governments seeking to increase revenues, which put Proposition 99 on the ballot, but it is a loss for religious communities.

See the statewide ballot results: http://vote.sos.ca.gov/Returns/props/59.htm

New Cell Phone Laws for Drivers

Two new laws aim to increase driver safety, though they decrease family choice.  Starting July 1, Californians must use a hands-free device when driving and using cell phones.  Projected fines range from $20 to over $150, depending on the number of violations and additional penalty assessments.  Convictions appear on driving records.  The DMV will not, however, add violation points.  When making emergency 911 calls, drivers age 18 and older may hold their cell phones.

Families should note that drivers under age 18 will not be permitted to use any cell phone while driving, beginning July 1.  Driving with a hands-free devise is a secondary offense for minors, meaning that they cannot be pulled over for this.  Yet they can be pulled over solely for holding a cell phone and using it while driving.  No exceptions are made for parental consonant.  Yet again, California legislators have shown their willingness to trump parental decision making.

For more information, read the California DMV’s FAQS page: http://dmv.ca.gov/cellularphonelaws/index.htm

Boston Hospital Offers Transgender Treatment for Kids

Children's Hospital Boston now offers gender changes to children as young as seven.  At a Gender Management Service clinic, it helps boys develop feminine bodies and helps girls grow masculine bodies.  Its treatments delay puberty.  Adolescents then receive hormones, which 
cause growth to be in the height and form of the opposite sex.  Stephanie Grant told ABC News that her child hopes to receive treatment.  Her son said he was "so mad at God, because God made a mistake."   Dr. Norman Spack, who heads the clinic, believes he is helping children fix physical disorders and live out their true gender identities.

Yet Dr. Paul McHugh, University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at John Hopkins University, told FOXNews.com that "treating these children with hormones does considerable harm and it compounds their confusion."  One side effect is infertility.  Another is increased risk for breast cancer.  Austin Nimocks, senior counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, tells FOX that there will eventually be litigation against parents and physicians for "what is essentially child abuse."  Minors are too young to choose lasting physical changes and permanent infertility.

These patients are confused children, who are hurting because they believe they are trapped in the wrong gender body, and do not understand their true identities.  Californians can expect children to confuse their identities in increasing numbers -- rather than realize the truth -- if state laws like SB 777 are allowed to ban "discriminatory bias" against transsexuality in school curriculum and activities.  The confusion literally embodied by Dr. Spack's patients underscores the need for California voters to protect students in this state.  To act on their behalf, you can visit the SB 777 campaign at http://www.SaveOurKids.net.

Boston Gender Management Services clinic: http://www.childrenshospital.org/clinicalservices/Site2280/mainpageS2280P4.html

Sacramento Rally to Stop Taxpayer Abortion Funding, July 18

California taxpayers fund 95,000 Medi-Cal abortions each year, at the cost of $33 million.  Citizens will gather at the Capitol to call for change, on Wednesday, July, 18, at the Rally for LIFE.  Speakers include Walter Hoye of Issues4Life.org and women who have had abortions.  After lobbying training, citizens will visit some 35 Democrat representatives identified as "hopeful."  They do not usually vote for life, but may be persuaded.  Rally organizers have visited all Republican representatives and already received their support for eliminating abortion funding.  Particularly with a multi-billion state deficit, this is no time for $33 million to fund the abortions of nearly 100,000 babies annually.  It is time to speak for the children who cannot.

More details are available at http://www.california4life.org/ or by calling the Coalition for Women & Children at (916) 955-1577.

Save Our Kids Temporarily Suspends Campaign
Last week the Save Our Kids campaign to overturn SB 777 announced that we have suspended our campaign until after the November election. With the recent California Supreme Court decision redefining marriage, the highest priority for the pro-family movement is to restore the traditional definition of marriage. We have our opportunity on November 4th when the Protect Marriage initiative will appear on the California statewide ballot. The initiative will reaffirm the people’s vote and place in the state constitution Proposition 22’s language defining marriage as between one man and one woman.

“The Save Our Kids initiative would not have appeared on a ballot until the next statewide election, probably 2010, and it therefore makes sense to prioritize our efforts and focus on marriage,” stated Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute and campaign manager for Save Our Kids. “We know that citizens are just as passionate about overturning SB 777 as they are about restoring marriage. But we must prioritize our resources and save traditional marriage. We must unite together, focus our energy and pass the Protect Marriage initiative this year. Our children are counting on us.”

To assist Save Our Kids with preparing for the next phase of the campaign, volunteers are asked to send in the petitions they have already collected to the campaign headquarters:

Save Our Kids
660 J Street, Suite 250
Sacramento, CA 95814

U.S. Supreme Court Bans Death Penalty for Child Rapists
In a shocking 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled yesterday that laws allowing the execution of child rapists are unconstitutional. In Kennedy v. Louisiana, the court struck down a Louisiana law that provided for the death penalty in cases of child rape. The issue came before the court after Patrick Henry appealed his death sentence for raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter. The decision will also overturn the death sentence for fellow Louisianan Richard Davis who was convicted of repeatedly raping a 5-year-old.

The court overturned the death penalty law because it found it “cruel and unusual punishment” banned under the 8th Amendment to U.S. Constitution. Writing in his majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy stated that “The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child.”

In his dissent, Justice Samuel Alito declared, “The harm that is caused to the victims and to society at large by the worst child rapists is grave. It is the judgment of the Louisiana lawmakers and those in an increasing number of other states that these harms justify the death penalty."

Rep. Pete Schneider, the Louisiana legislator who authored the law, was outraged by the decision, challenging the five Supreme Court justices, “When are you going to have the courage to stand up for what's right for all of the people — but especially the children under 12 that have been brutally raped by monsters?"

“Once again, millions of Americans are being held hostage by four or five black-robed tyrants imposing their social agenda on the rest of us,” stated Meredith Turney, legislative liaison for Capitol Resource Family Impact. “True ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ is the emotional suffering young children will endure for the rest of their lives after their innocence is savagely taken from them. The five justices who decided this case should be ashamed of their total disregard for protecting children from inhuman criminals and the people’s right to pass laws punishing such animals.”

City on the Hill is July 8-13!
The deadline for submitting City on the Hill applications is Saturday, June 28th. City on the Hill students are offered a unique opportunity that few citizens ever experience. Worldview training, learning the legislative process from the inside, meeting with elected officials, and impacting our culture are just a few of the priceless experiences students will remember for life. Don’t miss the chance to send your child to this unforgettable conference!

City has a high number of scholarship requests this year. If you would like to invest in the future of a student, please send donations to

CRI
660 J Street, Suite 250
Sacramento, CA 95814

Please write City on the Hill in the memo of your check.

Legislative Update
Tomorrow is the deadline for Sacramento lawmakers to pass their bills out of policy committees. After Friday, any bills that failed to pass committees will be considered dead for the 2008-2009 legislative session. Bills making it out of policy committees must then come before appropriations committees to consider their fiscal impact on the state.

Although legislators are scheduled to take their summer recess July 3-August 4, they cannot adjourn until a state budget has passed. The constitutional deadline for passing a budget was June 15th. Now an annual tradition, lawmakers are engaged in a partisan battle over the budget, and it’s anyone’s guess when a state budget will actually pass. Republicans are holding firm on cutting spending across the board, especially in light of the estimated $16 billion state government debt. Democrats are considering exorbitant tax increases without cutting government programs. Legislation will take a backseat this summer as politicians haggle over California’s purse strings.

CRI Needs Volunteers!
With the marriage campaign, our youth leadership conference, legislation and all the other programs CRI and CRFI run for citizens, we have our hands full! We are in desperate need of volunteers to help us with our many activities. Our office is a fast-paced, fun work environment and you’ll be at the center of the California pro-family movement.

If you have some spare time to help this summer, please contact La Tanya Wright: ltgwright@gmail.com or (916) 498-1940 x 10.