‘CA vs. Hate’ Agency Ramping up for 2024 Presidential Election

California vs. Hate is celebrating one year of being in business.

Under the umbrella of the California Civil Rights Department, CA vs. Hate, a hotline to report incidences of “hate,” held a press conference Monday morning “to reveal new data highlighting the impact of California vs Hate in its first year of operation and announce new and ongoing initiatives to combat hate across the state.”

I received the press announcement about the Monday press conference, not from the California Civil Rights Department, but from:

Sarah Rudney

she.her.hers

Director, Communications

TaskForce.us

TaskForce, which says “Create Culture to Change Culture,” was founded in 2010 following the completion of the Obama Hope Campaign,” according to the website. Their clients include the “United Nations Foundation, the White House, The Nature Conservancy, The MacArthur Foundation, Rock The Vote, The County of Los Angeles, Amnesty International, and beyond.” Doesn’t the State of California have communications employees? Why are we paying an outside firm to do PR for the California Civil Rights Department?

“California’s New Department of Hate for Snitches, Tattletales and Grievance Hustlers” was created last year the Globe reported in May 2023, CA vs. Hate.

What is a hate act? According to California’s new Department of Snitches (CA vs Hate):

“A hate incident is a hostile expression or action that may be motivated by bias against another person’s actual or perceived identity.”

“Some examples of hate incidents can include: derogatory name calling, bullying, hate mail, and refusing service.”

The claim that by reporting hate acts and hate speech to the California Department of Hate will “put a stop to hate” is patently absurd and merely state-sanctioned grievance hustling – on the taxpayer’s dime – a very big dime. “California awarded $91 million in grants to local organizations that help prevent hate crimes or support survivors, part of an unprecedented effort to combat hate in a state that saw a 20% increase in such crimes in 2022,” CalMatters reported. And we wonder why the governor’s budget has a $55 billion deficit… 

Based on today’s CA vs. Hate press conference, that $91 million was rather unsuccessful in preventing hate, but it employed a lot of people who apparently stink at their jobs.

Perhaps ironically, reported hate crimes jumped 33% from 2020 to 2021 – under Gov. Gavin Newsom’s reign. So, according to the governor, hate crimes have jumped significantly since he’s been Governor.

It’s not difficult to ask “Why is California is leading the nation in these hate crime attacks?” and conclude that under Newsom’s reign hostility, anxiety, fear, and hate are exploding. His policies are destroying Californias’ way of life, and the once-Golden State.

“Officially launched a year ago this month by Governor Newsom, CA vs Hate is the state’s first-ever multilingual statewide hotline and online portal that provides a safe, anonymous reporting option for victims and witnesses of hate acts,” the press announcement said. “CA vs Hate is one key piece of a statewide coordinated and strategic response to directly address hate in California, which in recent years reached its highest reported levels since 2001 — increasing more than 20% from 2021 to 2022.”

The annual report for The Commission on the State of Hate reports that the Commission receives an annual appropriation of $1.8 million through fiscal year 2025-2026 and $900,000 in fiscal year 2026-2027. But they sure can spend money if the $91 million in grants is any indicator.

“The Commission’s vision is for California to be free of hate.”

Governor Newsom signed AB 1126 by Assemblyman Richard Bloom (D-Santa Monica) into law in October 2021, which established the Commission on the State of Hate, “providing that it is an appointed public body to engage in fact-finding, advisement, and community outreach to assist the State in preventing and responding to hate.”

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill “Creates unknown, ongoing annual costs in the hundreds of thousands to low millions of dollars to establish and continue the operation of the Commission. These costs include support staff for the Commission as well as operating expenses and equipment, and per diem and travel reimbursement costs for non-legislative commissioners.”

Why is an agency addressing “hate” necessary in California? Bring back the Golden Rule, the principle of treating others as one would want to be treated by them, which used to be taught in school by teachers.

What is the underlying need or motive for all of this hate talk?

Kevin Kish, the Director of Civil Rights Department, said at today’s press conference, that in the first year, the CA vs. Hate hotline received 1,000 actual reports of hate from 2,000+ contacts. “All you need to know is because of who you are you were targeted and need help,” Kish said.

The most common reasons cited for the reports were:

• discriminatory treatment (18.4%),
• verbal harassment (16.7%), and
• derogatory names or slurs (16.7%)

The most common location types for where an incident occurred were:

• residential (29.9%)
• workplace (9.7%) and
• public facilities (9.1%)

Kish said data were examined by CA vs. Hate staff, to determine bias motivation information, which includes the most cited bias motivations: race and ethnicity (35.1%), gender identity (15.1%), and sexual orientation (10.8%).

“Data should not be treated as representative of all acts of hate,” Kish added as an interesting disclaimer.

Yet the Commission says in the annual report, “The Commission is relying on two sources of information in this regard. First, it is investing in reviewing and procuring rigorous empirical research to create a fuller and more nuanced understanding of hate activity in California and how to prevent it.”

How to prevent hate?

From the annual report:

“This includes: understanding the types of data and information being collected across
governmental entities and non-governmental organizations today; systematically reviewing and synthesizing existing research; partnering with subject-matter research experts, including academics, community organizations, law enforcement, and CRD staff; evaluating existing programs and policies in light of the evidence base that exists to identify effective or promising initiatives; and procuring original research studies to address high-priority knowledge gaps.”

There is your make-work: The Commission will be “partnering, systematically reviewing, synthesizing, evaluating, procuring and addressing.” …sounds like a lot of meetings and roundtable discussions to me.

You’ll be comforted to know that “The Subcommittee on Community Forums has held one listening session.”

And, “the number of organizations and people working to protect Californians from hate inspires the work of the Commission.”

But the real basis for the creation of the Commission on Hate and the CA vs. Hate hotline is Donald Trump:

“The Commission also recognizes the harm that can arise from acts that do not necessarily rise to the level of a hate crime, such as hate speech and hateful rhetoric from public officials. For example, in March of 2020, the week after President Trump’s first Tweet using the words ‘Chinese virus,’ the number of Twitter anti-Asian hashtags increased by 174 times.”

and

“…hate crimes against Muslims spiked in the two weeks following then-candidate Trump’s call for a ‘total and complete shutdown’ of the country’s borders to Muslim people.”

If you don’t believe me, CalMatters reported in September 2023:

“Researchers say that while the state’s reported hate crime numbers appear to be dipping slightly in 2023, the upcoming presidential election is likely to turn up the temperature even more.”

Now California considers political elections opportunities for investigating hate?

Because no statutory definition of hate incidents exists, the Commission created a “working definition.”

And because “the Commission is charged with developing policy recommendations, it
will likely need to explore topics beyond the adopted definitions of hate crimes and hate incidents that are described above. It will also need to explore topics that address the systemic
nature of hate today.”

Expect to see “hate” legislation in the coming year.

Make work – make jobs. This is a commission in search of a problem and purpose, and a helluva lot of state funding.

But remember, “The Commission’s vision is for California to be free of hate.”