Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger May 24, 2009

State Capitol Building

Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: “Governor plans to completely eliminate welfare for families,” Los Angeles Times,
May 21, 2009

Dear Honorable Governor Schwarzenegger,

I read with interest the item posted on the online blog section of L.A.
Times.

Your proposal, if true as reported, will be “revolutionary” in employing

the State of California as the “testing water” for the across-the-board reform to control
and substantially reduce the state budget deficit among other vexing fiscal issues.

However, there will be repercussions and ramifications following the

action of your decision state-wide, especially in densely populated areas comprised of
Caucasian, African-American, Hispanic and other races, with some areas significantly
populated with Blacks such as South Central L.A. and Hispanic, legal and undocumented,
in the encompassing area of Southern California.

I will explain how the scenario may occur following the cuts in social
programs related to welfare and higher education grant.

1.) There will be an upsurge of violent, property and other acts of crime
committed by the poor and economically disadvantaged “driven” to desperation when
their dependence on welfare is cut off at the time of economic uncertainty and expensive
living standard in terms of land value, particularly metropolitan and suburban areas, that
encompasses the state of California.

If your express concern for the safety and security of good, diligent, hard-
working citizens matters to secure the stability of the state after your cuts become
effective, you would have to call on the law enforcement forces to convene to organize
and prepare to control the potential crises arising from the sudden surge of crime in
reaction to the abolishment of welfare, at least temporarily while you continue to serve in
office until the end of your term.

Despite your attitude towards the citizens’ gun rights (You stated on
JoinArnold.com web site, which was published August 2003, “I am a strong supporter of
the second amendment. The U.S. constitution allows for law-abiding citizens to own a
firearm.”), if you believe that good citizens have the right to self-defense in light of your
sweeping cut to control state fiscal matters, I offer a suggestion which you may or may
not disagree with.

I suggest working towards the goal of establishing a shall-issue concealed

carry law for the good citizens by calling on the conservative Republican members of the
California State Assembly to draft the bill that overhaul some existing gun control laws in
reform and abolish or regulate the exercising power of county authority (sheriff or police
chief) in “biased & selective” attitude towards concealed carry rights for the purpose of
legit self-defense (i.e., prejudice against common good citizens’ reasonable need,
favoritism towards celebrities in politics, entertainment and business industry, etc).

This way the good citizens who hold the license will be able to walk
without fear of violence imposed upon them for reason of hatred under economic distress
and other regressive factors that transpire social disharmony reacting to the government’s
tightening of fiscal matters. Police may not be “legally” and “morally” obliged to protect
the good citizens of the public when the violence (i.e. riots) spiral out of control under the
pressure of economic despair affecting the poor struggling to get by on state welfare
programs.

You must understand such “radical” measure may incur an extreme social
outcome that may be counterproductive to your plan to enforce absolute control of state
fiscal for correction after enduring the disappointment at the rejection of your favored
propositions by popular vote.

2.) The hundreds of thousands of illegal and undocumented immigrants

residing in California, specifically Hispanic population, may migrate to nearby states in
Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, and Utah once their dependence on welfare for family support,
financial assistance, food stamp, housing, et cetera is cut off as the result of your new
policy that may remain effective until the end of your term to be rescinded by the
successor.

Illegal and undocumented immigration is always a problem not only for

California but also the surrounding states plus Utah, New Mexico and Texas. Perhaps an
ideal solution is to work on reducing the state fiscal indebtedness while organizing to
gather intelligence and prepare to apprehend undocumented aliens to imprison
temporarily and process the deportation to countries of origin en masse.

By this method, many undocumented aliens will no longer be dependent

on welfare programs that “drain” the fiscal strength of the state budget that may give rise
to extreme measure to eliminate by reduction the unwanted “leeches” by the thousands up
to half a million or more. The mandatory deportation irrespective of the undocumented
aliens’ rights to reside in California/U.S. ‘unlawfully’ (emphasis on ‘undocumented’;
those who do not have the proof of a work visa, resident alien document and/or “green
card”) should be established with common sense in regards to the matter of human rights
and fiscal management devoted to reducing the population of undocumented aliens.

Allocate some portion of the remaining money to build and tighten the
border between California and Mexico and vigilantly enforce the law at the ports and the
coast where the boats containing illegal aliens may sail to arrive.

3.) Should you choose to cut out Cal Grants completely, there will be
expected heat that might rise to mischief and violence among some destitute student
population dependent on Cal Grants. You should urge them to “weather the storm” by
deferring education to obtain sustainable employment to create small savings towards
education fund or apply to receive federal student aids and/or grants to continue education
uninterrupted until your term in office ends. Some students, faced by economic and
“mental” desperation when their education is interrupted, may rise to unlawfulness that
will require response by police forces to suppress the threat of mischief and violence.
Good citizens should not be subject to belligerent behavior of angry students who may
resort to violence in response to economic despair and educational interruption because of
idleness.

I ask that you please consider the repercussion of the unprecedented cut in
not only the history of California, but also the United States after the period of Lyndon B.
Johnson Administration which introduced “The Great Society” with the welfare system
which may not have produced a desired result to rectify socio-economic problems but
instead create the deplorable system that fosters social and economic discord, dependence
and crime in the welfare state. This transpires the deleterious effect that saps the fiscal
system of the state which is “forcedly” obliged to allocate excess amounts of state funds
towards welfare for the needy and often the idle who may possess negative attitude
towards the importance of work ethics as the able and productive contributor to the
society. Such state funds should not go to the idle but the truly needy, the infirm and the
disabled.

To reiterate, I am aware that based on your past preference for gun control
because you are a “peace-loving guy,” you may disagree with my suggestion to work on
liberating California gun control laws pertaining to concealed carry (inscribed in the
Second Amendment “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” and
applicable under 9th, 10th and 14th Amendments) for the good citizens who want to
protect self and property from unlawful forces by the criminal element intent on violation
and intrusion with terrorist violence in riots and other perilous outcomes. Is not self-
defense paramount to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in vigilant defense of self,
family, and property and enforce the rule of law with just force against the evil and illicit
elements that cannot be curbed, controlled and suppressed by law enforcement in the
jurisdiction of the cities and county?
 Governor, give the letter the weight of your thought in the foresight of
potential social crises by my advice, especially the potentially dire social consequences by
unhinged people reacting to the cuts that may disturb and affect their impoverished or
disadvantaged lives.

I am from the State of Utah and I have not visited Southern California
since spring 2001. I formerly resided in Chatsworth in the northwestern region of Los
Angeles County for the period of a combined five months in 1999 and 2001 for the
purpose of temporary employment. I visited the City of San Francisco on a business
expedition in spring 2004 and I did not enjoy the stay there because of homeless
population that intruded upon my personal space by pandering, etc.

The State of California, under the auspices of a competent and strong-

willed Governor and the State Assembly that listen with intent and reasonably to the
constituency concerned about the overall social and fiscal health of the state, has a
potential to thrive in greatness as one of the largest economies in the world. California
has numerous social, financial, and political problems to deal with like almost any other
state, and your radical measure may inspire other state governors and governmental
administrators to propose similar measures if the outcome is demonstrably productive
without severely adverse effects.

I wish you the best in managing the state of California as good, fair,
responsible, and prosperous as it ought to be towards the general welfare and security of
diligent, just, and hard-working citizenry.

Thank you for some of your valuable time.

[Name & address redacted; signature]