Gov. Jerry Brown has been signing — and vetoing — a flurry of bills in recent weeks. In January, new laws will go into effect that will grant licenses to some undocumented immigrants, ban therapies designed to turn gay people straight and give some prisoners with life sentences a chance at a new sentence. The governor vetoed the so-called Trust Act, that would have shielded some immigrants from deportation, and a bill that would have granted rights to domestic workers. We discuss the scores of new laws and the ones the governor has rejected.

Paul Rogers, environment reporter for the San Jose Mercury News, and managing editor of Quest, KQED's science and environment series
Don Thompson, reporter for the Associated Press
Marisa Lagos, political reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle

  • Bill_Woods

    So ‘life without parole’ turns out to mean life with parole, eventually.
    How’s that going to affect the death-penalty proposition?

  • Morgan M.

    I have been following the healthcare bills lately…Do any of the guests understand SB 1196? That’s the bill on disclosure of claims data by providers and insurers to qualified entities. I’m curious about how this changes or adds to SB 751?

  • Colin

    The Governor Signed SB1229, a bill that would bar landlords from advertising that they preferred not to rent to tenants with declawed cats or devocalized dogs. Since declawing and devocalizing pets are perfectly legal procedures in California, how is the new law not an unconstitutional limit on commercial speech? Should the governor and the Legislature take a crash course in the First Amendment before they pass any more silly bans on protected speech?

  • Ramona

    If you don’t have your vaccines. Stay locked in your homes with your paranoia. You are a walking death machine.

  • Thang N.

    Longtime listener here. I feel that prop 34 is overlooking some major problems in our legal system. For instance, the appeals process needs a revamp because defendants keep abusing and continuously delaying the process to the point where the system gets congested and very expensive for the state. Law enforcement will still need to investigate murder cases. The court system will still need to deliberate such cases. And defendants facing life will not suddenly plead guilty with the elimination of the death penalty. What we must do is fix the legal system in a way that optimizes and streamlines the appeals process.
    I’m a democrat and like all Americans I believe in the right to life – especially the victim’s right to life. I’m very concerned of what this prop could mean for our safety. In San Jose where I live, which is suppose to be the safest big city in the country, this city has seen a surge in bloodshed mainly between Hispanic gang rivalries (Nortenos and Surenos). In August alone, San Jose witnessed 8 homicides in 10 straight days – 11 homicide cases in less than two weeks. The state is already heavily striping law abiding citizens of their gun rights as their sole deterrent against such dangers. (And remind me again how criminals are so good at following the law when it comes to guns?) Add to that, our city among others in California is enduring enourmous budget cuts along with a new reduced pension plan that backfired sending away 300 plus high quality police officers to leave. We were at about 1400 officers but we are now down to roughly 1100 (per Mercury News report). Department morale is so beat that Chief officer Chris Moore has even left.  With this new prop going into effect, what major deterrent do we have left to leverage against would-be murderers? 

    Also, I believe that proponents of prop 34 has misled the public about the cost benefits of keeping inmates off death row. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) tracks the cost of housing inmates per prison and some prisons cost more others. San Quentin houses all of the death row inmates and their budget is roughly $57,000  per inmate (per 2009 State Audit Report).  This figure is highly distorted by proponents of prop 34 on which they claim to be closer to $90,000 per inmate. Eliminating the death penalty does  not eliminate the immense cost of housing these inmate and it does not change the states responsibility to provide costly comprehensive healthcare to its inmates. And these inmates are getting life sentences, so the healthcare cost per inmate will grow out of  budget as they grow older and run into more complications. So all criminals get quality healthcare while most citizens for the longest time has not had access to quality healthcare?! If anything, it’s starting to sound more rewarding to commit murder than not! Ridiculous! 

  • DB

    God bless you Democrats in the legislature, Governor Brown, and Equality California for ending the torture of children. As a father, I can’t imagine my child every having to go through what those ‘ex-gay’ groups advocate.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor