Are California Democrats actively trying to make themselves irrelevant?

https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/emilyhoeven/article/california-
legislature-newsom-child-trafficking-20305199.php

Are California Democrats trying to make themselves irrelevant? 

They must be — because it’s getting increasingly difficult to come up with 
rational explanations for the self-sabotaging actions they’re taking in 
the state Legislature. 

After a month that saw prominent state Democratic leaders take absurd 
stances on bills to improve early childhood literacy and housing 
availability, Assembly members on Thursday argued for more than an hour 
about whether it should be a felony to purchase 16- and 17-year-olds for 
sex.  

Their ultimate conclusion: We’ll think about it — but probably not.

Assembly Democrats overwhelmingly voted to strip AB379 by Assembly Member 
Maggy Krell, D-Sacramento, of its key provision — to toughen penalties for 
offenders convicted of purchasing 16- and 17-year-olds for sex to match 
the punishments for those convicted of purchasing kids 15 and younger. 

Instead, they inserted an amendment stating, “It is the intent of the 
Legislature to adopt the strongest laws to protect 16- and 17-year-old 
victims and strengthen protections in support of victims of human 
trafficking.” Krell’s name, along with those of nearly two dozen co-
authors, was also wiped from the bill and replaced with two new authors: 
Assembly Public Safety Chair Nick Schultz, D-Burbank, and Assembly Member 
Stephanie Nguyen, D-Elk Grove (Sacramento County). 

The irony, of course, is that keeping Krell’s intact bill would have been 
the strongest protection for 16- and 17-year-old victims. 

Krell knows what she’s talking about: As a former prosecutor in the 
California Department of Justice, she helped bring down Backpage, one of 
the largest sex trafficking websites in the world. 

The Democrats’ refusal to back her effort forced Gov. Gavin Newsom to take 
a break from podcasting and issue a stern statement: “The law should treat 
all sex predators who solicit minors the same — as a felony, regardless of 
the intended victim’s age.” 

Why are the consequences for those who try to purchase sex from 16- or 17-
year-olds different from other minors in the first place?

Last year, state Sen. Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield, introduced a bill to 
require child sex buyers to face felony charges. At the time, offenders 
faced only misdemeanor charges — a maximum of one year in jail and a 
potential $10,000 fine.  

Grove was fresh off a giant political victory over Democrats: In 2023, the 
Assembly Public Safety Committee killed her bill to classify human 
trafficking of minors as a “serious” felony, arguing that offenders 
already faced potentially lengthy sentences. This tone-deaf reasoning 
sparked immediate backlash and a swift intervention from Newsom and 
Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister (San Benito County), and 
Grove’s bill was revived and signed into law.

But Democrats in the Senate Public Safety Committee balked at Grove’s new 
bill, suggesting it could lead to teenagers being punished for having sex 
with each other or be weaponized against LGBT people. Over Grove’s 
objections, they amended the bill to loosen protections for 16- and 17-
year-olds. Under the revised bill, which Newsom signed into law, people 
convicted of purchasing kids 15 and younger for sex could face either 
misdemeanor or felony charges on the first offense and felony charges on 
the second offense. But those protections would only apply to 16- and 17-
year-olds if they could prove they were victims of human trafficking.   

This carve-out was a political compromise, but it made little logical or 
moral sense. As Krell emphasized in passionate comments Thursday, “There 
is no such thing as a child prostitute.” She noted that under federal law, 
“You’re automatically a victim of human trafficking if you’re under 18 and 
bought for sex. … Sex without consent, that’s rape. The exchange of money 
doesn’t change that.”   

But, once again, Democrats are contorting themselves into rhetorical 
pretzels to defend the indefensible.  

“This bill with the amendments sends a clear message to every 16- and 17-
year-old who has been caught in the nightmare of human trafficking — you 
are not invisible, you are not alone, and we will fight for you,” 
proclaimed Assembly Member Mark González, D-Los Angeles.

The amendments sent a message, all right — that purchasing a 16- or 17-
year-old for sex isn’t as bad as purchasing other underage victims. 

Meanwhile, Assembly Member Marc Berman, D-Menlo Park, chastised Republican 
lawmakers for their “selective outrage,” noting that President Donald 
Trump sought to appoint former Rep. Matt Gaetz — who was found to have 
likely engaged in sexual activity with a 17-year-old girl — as his 
attorney general. 

Yet Berman’s argument undermined his own stance: By refusing to support 
Krell’s bill in its original form, he was effectively arguing that people 
who purchase 17-year-old prostitution victims shouldn’t face more severe 
penalties. His view would give the Matt Gaetz’s of the world a pass.  

Schultz, meanwhile, slammed the Assembly for “playing politics” with the 
bill. After the Assembly Public Safety Committee on Tuesday voted to pass 
Krell’s bill after once again carving out older teenagers, Republicans — 
sensing blood in the water — said they would force a floor vote on the 
issue Thursday, and Krell defied Assembly leadership by announcing she 
planned to vote with Republicans. This infuriated Rivas and Schultz, who 
said Krell had agreed to accept the committee’s revisions.

But what the Democratic caucus sees as political insubordination, average 
Californians are likely to see as a righteous battle. 

“Somehow, as the president tanks our economy and deports innocent 
children, the American people still don’t trust Democrats,” said Assembly 
Member Jasmeet Bains, D-Bakersfield. “Any sane person knows that 
purchasing a 16- or 17-year-old for sex should be a felony, not a 
misdemeanor. This should not be a debate.” 

But even Newsom’s intervention couldn’t save Krell’s bill Thursday — 56 
Assembly Democrats voted to move the bill forward with the Schultz and 
Nguyen amendments. Republicans were joined by just three Democrats in 
voting against the amendments: Krell, Bains and Assembly Member Joaquin 
Arambula, D-Fresno. 

Ignoring Newsom, a lame-duck governor with just one year left in his term, 
is one thing. But clinging to nonsensical arguments in defense of bad 
policy is another. 

Rather than admit they’re wrong, far too many Democrats seem perfectly 
happy to sanctimoniously dig the party’s political grave.


-- 
November 5, 2024 - Congratulations President Donald Trump.  We look 
forward to America being great again.

We live in a time where intelligent people are being silenced so that 
stupid people won't be offended.

Every day is an IQ test. Some pass, some, not so much.

Thank you for cleaning up the disasters of the 2008-2017, 2020-2024 Obama 
/ Biden / Harris fiascos, President Trump.

Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the 
The World According To Garp.  Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood 
queer liberal democrat donors.