.

Congressman Waxman Moves to Manhattan Beach

Congressman Henry Waxman set up a satellite office in the South Bay. Now more than ever constituents should bagder him on the pressing issues of our time, in the South Bay and Washington D.C.

Congressman Waxman is setting up a South Bay office off of Rosecrans Avenue in Manhattan Beach. The real estate is an ideal location, right on the border between El Segundo and Manhattan Beach, near the aerospace industries as well as the Beach Cities.

Someone ought to set up shop outside of his office and demand that he address the following issues:

1. The plight of homeless veterans. The Santa Monica Daily Press reported that Waxman issued another flurry of letters to investigate the amount of money which private lenders are taking in on the Brentwood VA campus. The truth is that the land does not belong to those private interests in the first place, but to the armed forces who return stateside and need care. There is no excuse for veterans to be living on the street or burdened by excessive pharmaceuticals without proper in-patient oversight.

A corps of contractors will be fitting in seismic improvements to the Brentwood VA, in partial readiness for the veterans who will be living there. While Waxman "laments" the amount of time that it took for the restructuring to take place, he should look no further than himself for blame, since he was representing the Brentwood VA and the surrounding regions for nearly four decades . Now that Waxman has set up shop nearby, it's time that every veteran in the region give this Congressman more than a piece of their mind on his sluggish response to Veterans' homelessness.

Easy Reader News also reported that a Hermosa Beach veteran, Larry Delassus, died of cardiac arrest in the Torrance Courthouse last year. He was engaged in fraught litigation to save his beach-side home from foreclosure. Wells Fargo Bank had assessed his properly incorrectly, relying on an incorrect parcel number. Delassus had paid his mortgage two months in advance. As far as mismanaged paperwork is concerned, the bank took responsibility for the mistakes, according to one source, yet the bank refused to relent on demanding a higher interest rate.

One has to wonder: where was Congressman Waxman when this man was struggling to hold onto his home? To his credit, Waxman has helped Russian immigrants process their paperwork. He has helped other constituents in their battles with big banks. Where was the Congressman when Delassus was left to his own devices (plus the assistance of a strong advocate named Anthony Trujillo)?

2. Waxman must put a cap on Cap and Trade and global warming . Now that Congressman Waxman has an office in the South Bay, he cannot ignore the truth that the region endured an intense cold snap over the past week. On some nights, the temperature reached into near-freezing levels. So much for the notion that the sun is burning up the earth. The earth is getting warmer, but that does not imply man-made causes or manmade solutions.

3. Gun-control is all the rage now, and President Obama brought forth a wall of children at his latest press conference , before whom he outlined his executive orders for tracking the mentally ill and toughening sanctions for gun crimes. "Woe to the nation whose prince is a child" wrote King Solomon at the end of his days, when he rued the gross mistakes of his youth instead of relying on his child-like "hearing heart". For the President to enact sweeping domestic policy following the emotional plea of a small gathering of school-aged children nearly amounts to the same. Like the children at the President's press conference, Congressman Waxman is leading with his emotions and not his reason on gun control, and certainly he is avoiding the heart of the matter.

Santa Monica has even discussed banning toy guns from the city. As if children’s playing cops and robbers is a threat to public safety, Santa Monica City leaders now want to disarm the kids. Cities can take away the guns from "the good guys", but it will not stop the "bad guys" from getting the guns and committing all sorts of crimes. Congressman Waxman has vocally supported resurrecting US Senator Dianne Feinstein's assault weapons ban, a sweeping reform which did not prevent gun violence, like Columbine or Oklahoma City.

Of course, there are the three major deadlines pressing on the United States Federal government, from the sequester to the debt ceiling and finally funding the government. Congressman Waxman voted for the fiscal cliff, and he continues droning about protecting the middle class from tax hikes, even though he has a distinct record of voting against middle class tax cuts, and he supported a massive number of tax increases, Obama-WaxmanCare, which have descended on us starting this year.

Perhaps "Occupy Manhattan Beach" or "Occupy Henry Waxman's Office" should move in, too. It would likely be a shock to his system, since for nearly forty years he never had to pay attention to constituents or research serious breaches of the public trust, like the ill-treatment of LA area veterans or the gross mismanagement of our tax dollars at the federal level.

Congressman Waxman has set up an office in Manhattan Beach. Every voter in the 33rd should pay him a visit.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Greg Davidson January 26, 2013 at 05:21 PM
Mr. Schaper, do you believe that you are morally bound to write the truth as you know it, and to correct yourself when you make statements that you learn are false or unsubstantiated? Or are you like a lawyer in an adversarial court case, free to throw out arguments that you know to be false in pursuit of your position, and never to acknowledge when you have defrauded your readers? If you believe the latter, there's not much to be said in the way of dialogue - but if you acknowledged that was the ethical bar that you were aiming for, at least you would not be writing under false pretenses. And if you do believe that your writing should be held to standards of truth and accuracy, could you please explain the basis of your belief that a brief cold snap in a relatively small part of the globe refutes the scientific consensus concerning climate change?
Arthur Christopher Schaper January 26, 2013 at 08:16 PM
"The earth is getting warmer, but that does not imply man-made causes or manmade solutions." I wrote this statement in my post above -- did you read it, or are you acting "like a lawyer in an adversarial court case" and unjustifiably assuming that I am "writing under false pretenses"? I am astounded at the number of comments which I receive, and the posts give the impression that people did not even read what I wrote.
Arthur Christopher Schaper January 26, 2013 at 08:18 PM
I have made room for the reality that there is global warming. I wrote that quote in the post above.That is more than the truth as I know it, that was the truth as four separate scientists had shared on "Sunday Morning" two months ago. As or what is causing global warming, and as for what to do about it, those answers remain open to discussion or debate. Cap and Trade is not the answer. Coincidentally enough, I had a very civil discussion about Waxman, the Beach areas, global warming, and the utter failure of Cap and Trade with a resident from Palos Verdes. The man was a Democrat, by the way, but he respected my opinions on the issues, and vice versa. He did not resort to calling out "false pretenses" or "unethical this and that", as if those words would intimidate me. Mr. Davidson, please read before your "screed". Thanks for writing.
Arthur Christopher Schaper January 26, 2013 at 08:32 PM
If it's nonsense, then do not respond to it. And now I will have a little fun . . "No Breitbart-baiting, this time? I am disappointed . . . "Yawn. Yaaaaaawwwwwwwn." Please, have a sense of humor, Jack.
Greg Davidson January 27, 2013 at 06:53 AM
There is nothing uncivil about asking whether you stand by the truth of your words, or not. There's nothing unethical about acting as a lawyer in an adversarial court case, throwing out arguments that you don't fully believe, if those are the rules of the forum in which you are participating. In your columns here, I have asked you a simple question: do you stand with integrity behind what you say? If you do, just let us all know - and if not, we can know your words are not to be trusted. Personally, I hope it is the former - that you will stand by your words, or correct yourself if you are in error. But then you will be held to a higher standard for the accuracy of your statements. Here is your specific quotation: " Waxman must put a cap on Cap and Trade and global warming . Now that Congressman Waxman has an office in the South Bay, he cannot ignore the truth that the region endured an intense cold snap over the past week. On some nights, the temperature reached into near-freezing levels. So much for the notion that the sun is burning up the earth" The implication of your words is that an intense cold snap in the region is a truth that is relevant to Congressman Waxman's position on Cap and Trade and Global Warming. If that's what you meant, you clearly do not understand the scienceof climate change. If that's not what you meant, could you please provide an alternate explanation for your words, or correct yourself to say what you actually mean.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »