U.S. House of RepresentativesCandidate for District 20
Ronald Paul Kabat
My Top 3 Priorities
- I will work for the Silent Majority to reverse the CA Sanctuary Status that is causing law and order frictions between Federal and State law officials.
- Secure 100 sq miles of multi-state habitable Federal land to be used to build small home cities for homeless Vets, run by Vets. Land must reasonably close trip to city VA clinics.
- The Social Security Retirement system is 15 years away from becoming insolvent. The Social Security Disability Fund is on life support with 3 years to insolvency.
Experience
Education
Community Activities
Questions & Answers
Questions from League of Women Voters of California Education Fund (5)
One type of financing I would suggest for infrastructure improvement would be 'GREENBACK' financing similar to the system that President Lincoln used to finance the Civil War for the Union.
I would support a 'safety net' similar to MediCal for those who need it paid for by block grants to each state by the Federal government.
I would support purchases of health insurance across state lines to increase competition.
I would support health insurance plans taylored to the needs of the individual coupled with medical IRA's.
I would support a Federal payments to subsidize health insurance for those who have pre-existing conditions.
I would support competitive drug pricing as used by the Veteran's Administration.
I would support additonal fraud, waste and abuse audits and create a 'reward' for major savings made by public suggestions.
I would support up to a 7 year ban on legal immigration so as to provide time to fix the current broken system.
The Sanctuary State bill (SB 54) must go. I would support a bill enforcing the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution against the politicians of California who are damaging the public by promoting the release of criminals back into our neighborhoods rather than turning them over to ICE for deportation.
Immigration policy is to be controlled by the Federal government not the State of California. If sedition charges have to be leveled against some public officials due to the damage they are leveling against our California citizens, then they must pay the price of their convictions.
Improve the capture of surface water runoff.
Increase water recycling.
Expand reservoirs.
Consider desal when financially feasible.
Tunnel may take too long when facing environmental challenges or not financially feasible.
No 'poop' water conversion if it also contains farm water pesticide runoff.
I just finished reading the 'Seventh' report.
I would audit the sampling technique of the firm that released this report to determine the bias percentage of their results.
They appear to throw percentages at you in their report but do not show how they arrived at their numbers.
I would put little faith in their results until, like that person in Missouri, they show me the proof.
If I have to suggest something, I would propose school education funding for a class in Courtesy.
Who gave money to this candidate?
Contributions
More information about contributions
Political Beliefs
Position Papers
California’s ‘Sanctuary State’ Policy (SB 54) vs. California’s 'Silent Majority' of Voters
State Legislators have placed an unwanted burden on the shoulders of California Citizens.
While I was gathering signatures to run for office, voters would ask me “What is your position on California’s ‘Sanctuary State’ status?”
I would usually reply:
1.) It is in conflict with our Constitution of the United States.
2.) It endangers our public safety officers, businesses and fellow law abiding citizens.
3.) It places local law enforcement officials in a dilemma. Many want to transfer criminal illegal aliens to ICE for deportation but are stopped from doing so because of the demands of local politicians.
4.) Some politicians have argued that there is an unreimbursed cost to the local government because the city or county may not get reimbursed for the additional costs involved for holding these criminals until ICE picks them up. I say what about the ‘cost’ to the family or individual or child who is robbed, beaten, murdered, etc. because the local government was not willing to absorb that additional cost?
5.) Did you know that the California governor recently expunged criminal records of illegal alien criminals so that their criminal records would not meet the deportation demands of ICE? Did he create a ‘privileged’ class of people by NOT expunging all criminal records of ALL INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SERVED THEIR TIME and are here legally?
I found that many people were NOT in favor of the California ‘SANCTUARY STATE STATUS’ and they told me that they were occasionally bullied when they talked about the subject. So, I did further research and found an article that contained a poll that was performed on 1,098 California citizens by the Institute of Governmental Studies of U.C. Berkeley. The article was titled Californians Say Cities Should Not Be Sanctuaries dated September 4, 2015 By Kathleen Maclay | UC Berkeley Media Relations. The Appendix of the article contained these results:
Appendix
The (following) material in parentheses was given to only half the respondents.
(An illegal immigrant who had been deported several times was recently released from jail in San Francisco and soon after shot and killed a woman walking with her parents near the Bay.)
Under California law, local jurisdictions like cities and counties can ignore requests from federal authorities to detain illegal immigrants who have been arrested and are about to be released.
Do you believe that local authorities should be able to ignore a federal request to hold an illegal immigrant who has been detained?
- Yes, local authorities should be able to ignore these federal requests.
- No, local authorities should not be able to ignore these federal requests.
|
Told About Shooting |
Not Told About Shooting |
Total |
|
|
Yes |
24.3% |
28.8% |
26.5% |
|
No |
75.7% |
71.2% |
73.5% |
By Partisanship – All Respondents
|
Democrats |
Independents |
Republicans |
|
|
Yes |
27.1% |
29.1% |
18.0% |
|
No |
72.9% |
70.9% |
82.0% |
By Income – All Respondents
|
Less than $25,000 |
$25,000-$49,999 |
$50,000-$74,999 |
$75,000-$99,999 |
$100,000-$149,999 |
$150,000+ |
|
|
Yes |
29.2% |
27.2% |
28.1% |
21.1% |
17.8% |
19.5% |
|
No |
70.8% |
72.8% |
71.9% |
78.9% |
82.2% |
80.5% |
By Age – All Respondents
|
Age 18-29 |
Age 30-39 |
Age 40-49 |
Age 50-65 |
Age 65+ |
|
|
Yes |
33.8% |
32.1% |
28.0% |
16.3% |
11.7% |
|
No |
66.2% |
67.9% |
72.0% |
83.7% |
88.3% |
By Race/Ethnicity – All Respondents
|
Asian |
Black |
Latino |
White |
|
|
Yes |
25.2% |
25.0% |
35.3% |
20.5% |
|
No |
74.8% |
75.0% |
64.7% |
79.5% |
By Education – All Respondents
|
Less than high school |
High school degree or equivalent |
Some college |
Bachelor’s degree |
Advanced degree |
|
|
Yes |
12.5% |
32.4% |
26.4% |
22.0% |
20.4% |
|
No |
87.5% |
67.6% |
73.6% |
78.0% |
79.6% |
By Gender – All Respondents
|
Female |
Male |
|
|
Yes |
22.9% |
26.9% |
|
No |
77.1% |
73.1% |
There were 1,098 respondents sampled between Aug. 11 and Aug. 26, 2015. The margin of error is 2.5%. Responses for the entire sample were weighted to reflect the statewide distribution of the California population by gender, race/ethnicity, education and age.
I believe that the preceding poll is correct and that there is a ‘disconnect’ between California voters and the Sacramento legislators who have placed an unwanted burden upon the voter's shoulders.
EXAMPLE: Monterey County Board of Supervisors and City of Monterey.
I attended the May 15, 2018 meetings of the County and City to see if the members would be willing to agenda the SB 54 issue for a later vote. During 10:30 AM Public Comment, they were told about SB 54 being unconstitutional and the dangers it presented to our law officers, citizens and businesses but they would not cooperate.
I learned that earlier in the morning, in ‘Closed Session’, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors passed a resolution for an amicus lawsuit in favor of SB 54 regarding The United States of America vs. The State of California. At 9 AM, they asked for public comment from an EMPTY CHAMBER before placing it in ‘Closed Session’ for a vote. This was contrary to the way the amicus lawsuit was handled for SB 1070 which was on the meeting agenda and open to PUBLIC COMMENT.
The People of Monterey County and the People of the City of Monterey should address their representatives to let them know that there are ways of opposing, upending and stopping SB 54. Their representatives can consider any of the following:
1.) Opt-Out Ordinance from SB 54;
2.) Resolution Opposing SB 54;
3.) Issue a Stay of Compliance until the court issues a final ruling on SB 54;
4.) File a lawsuit against the State of California;
5.) Join Huntington Beach’s lawsuit against California;
6.) File a Joinder with Department of Justice/Huntington Beach lawsuit.
If this does not work, you must either recall them or exercise your right at the ballot box.
The following California Counties and Cities have taken measures to oppose SB 54:
|
|
|
If elected in the June 5th Primary, I will be honored to represent you.
Cast your vote against Sanctuary State status by voting for me.
Thank you.
Are ‘Guns’ or ‘Big Pharma’ Drug Reactions at Fault for Our Mass Shootings?
Drug reactions may be a major part of the reasons some individuals become prone to violence and do not remember their deadly actions.
I’m a long time member of the NRA and a Vietnam veteran who was assigned an M-16, shotgun and 45 cal. pistol in war. I ask that you be open minded, fair and inquisitive when you read my research.
A few months ago, I listened to a radio program on KSCO 1080AM with a guest who was talking about ‘homicidal ideation’. I researched from the radio show to the US FDA to the following article which I believe explains why some mass shootings result.
Another Mass Shooting, Another Psychiatric Drug—27 Drug Warnings and 1,531 Cases of Drug-Induced Homicidal Ideation Back Need for Federal Investigation
“The drug Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock was prescribed, Valium, is a benzodiazepine documented by several studies to cause violence, aggression, homicidal ideation and suicide risk or attempts. New court records obtained by CNN indicate Paddock had been prescribed the drug as far back as 2013 ”
Twenty-seven drug regulatory agency warnings cite psychiatric drug side effects of mania, psychosis, violence and homicidal ideation; 1,531 cases of psychiatric drug induced homicide/homicidal ideation have been reported to the US FDA; 65 high profile cases of mass shootings/murder have been committed by individuals under the influence of these drugs, yet there has never been a federal investigation into the link between seemingly senseless acts of violence and the use of mind-altering psychotropic drugs.
By CCHR International
October 9, 2017
On October 1st, from a Las Vegas Mandalay Bay hotel room, 64-year-old Stephen Paddock opened fire upon a crowd of people, killing 59 and wounding more than 500 in the worst mass shooting in U.S. history. Almost immediately the press began speculating as to a possible motive in the shooting; rumored ties to terrorist organizations came and went, dispelled by law enforcement as groundless. No criminal records or ties to radical organizations were uncovered by the press. Yet amidst the speculation immediately following the shooting, none of the journalists attending the live broadcast press conference posed the question: Was there any indication the shooter was under the influence of a mind-altering prescribed drug?
Considering that mainstream media rarely pursues this line of questioning, that law enforcement isn’t required to reveal it, and that the psychiatric-pharmaceutical industry certainly doesn’t want to address it, the task often falls to individual journalists to dig up relevant facts.
Such was the case with Stephen Paddock.
Paul Harasim from the Las Vegas Review-Journal obtained records from the Nevada Prescription Monitoring Program showing Paddock was prescribed 50 10-milligram diazepam (Valium) tablets on June 21st, as well as 50 10-milligram tablets in 2016.
The drug Paddock was prescribed, diazepam, is a benzodiazepine documented by several studies to cause violence, aggression, homicidal ideation and suicide risk or attempts.
Now CNN has found that Paddock was prescribed the drug as far back as 2012.
In a 97-page 2013 court document exclusively obtained and released by CNN, Paddock himself admitted to being prescribed Valium when he was deposed as part of a civil suit he filed against the Cosmopolitan Hotel, after slipping on a walkway in 2011. According to CNN, the 2013 document reveals Paddock stating he was prescribed Valium for “anxiousness” and when asked whether he had a good relationship with the doctor who prescribed him the pills, he responded, “He’s like on retainer, I call it, I guess. It means I pay a fee yearly … I have good access to him.” CNN also notes that “Rage, aggressiveness and irritability are among the possible side effects of taking diazepam — better known as Valium, according to a manufacturer of the drug. It is not known when Paddock last took the drug.”
The fact is psychiatric drugs are documented by 27 international drug regulatory agency warnings and 16 published medical studies to cause side effects including mania, hostility, violence and even homicidal ideation. And while not everyone taking the drug will experience these particular side effects, what the warnings prove is that a percentage of the population will.
Furthermore according to the FDA’s MedWatch reporting system for drug side effects, over a 10-year period, the FDA received 1,531 cases of homicidal ideation/homicide attributed to psychiatric drugs, 40% of which were reported by medical professionals. The FDA admits that only 1-10% of drug side effects are ever reported to MedWatch, so taking a medium range of 5%, the number could easily be 30,620 cases of homicidal ideation/homicide attributed to psychiatric drugs.
Regarding the concept that psychiatric drugs could not have been a contributing factor in a case where the perpetrator was involved in extensive planning or preparations, we look to the definition of “homicidal,” which includes homicidal ideation, a similar concept to the “suicidal ideation” black box warning on antidepressant drugs:
“Homicidal … may encompass a broad variety of ideation and behaviors. They may range from globally aggressive thoughts… to a specific lethal plan with available means to carry it out.”
— Emergency Psychiatry journal
There have been 65 high profile acts of senseless violence, including mass school shootings, mass stabbings, and even the intentional crashing of a commercial airplane, committed by individuals taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs, resulting in 357 dead and 336 wounded. Drug proponents argue that there are thousands of shootings and acts of violence that have not been correlated to psychiatric drugs, and that is exactly the point. They have neither been confirmed nor refuted to have been connected to psychiatric drugs, as law enforcement is not required to investigate or report on prescribed drugs linked to violence, and media rarely pose the question.
New York legislation introduced in 2000 sought to require law enforcement to report psychotropic drug use in cases of violent crime
The New York State Senate recognized the lack of reporting correlating mind-altering psychiatric drugs to both suicide and violence as far back as 2000, when the senate introduced a bill which would “require police to report to the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS), certain crimes and suicides committed by persons using psychotropic drugs,” citing “a large body of scientific research establishing a connection between violence and suicide and the use of psychotropic drugs.”
Unfortunately that bill stalled out in the finance committee, yet if that bill had passed, a reporting system would be in place to determine the extent to which violence is committed by those under the influence of mind-altering prescribed drugs.
A cursory review of the 27 international drug regulatory warnings, the tens of thousands of cases of medical personnel citing psychiatric drug side effects of homicide, aggression, violence, mania and psychosis, and the 65 high profile acts of senseless violence committed by individuals either taking or withdrawing from these drugs, more than meets the criteria for a federal investigation.
With millions of Americans being prescribed psychiatric drugs, it’s apparent not everyone will experience violent reactions to the drugs, besides which, violence is only one of many documented side effects of psychiatric drugs. But what the drug regulatory agency warnings confirm, is that a percentage of the population will. And no one knows who will be next.
Some examples of high-profile cases where the individual was under the influence of such drugs include:
- Burlington, Washington – September 23, 2016: 20-year-old Arcan Cetin opened fire in a Macy’s department store at the Cascade Mall, killing 5 people. He was on three different psychiatric drugs—an antidepressant and ADHD drugs—as of 2015 and had been receiving drugs “like Prozac” in the months before the shooting. Side effects include homicidal ideation, agitation/hostility, mood changes and depression.
- Southern France – March 24, 2015: Pilot Andreas Lubitz deliberately crashed a Germanwings plane into the side of a mountain killing all 150 people on board. He was on an antidepressant and an anti-anxiety drug. Side effects of these drugs include homicidal ideation, hostility, aggression, mania and depression.
- Santa Barbara, California – May 23, 2014: 22-year-old Elliot Rodger stabbed three roommates to death at his apartment then drove to a sorority house where he shot three women, killing two of them. Driving again, he exchanged fire with deputies, hit a bicyclist, fired on other people in multiple locations and then killed himself having killed 6 and wounded 13 others. He was taking an anti-anxiety drug. Side effects include homicidal ideation, hallucinations, unusual changes in mood or behavior and depression.
- Fort Hood, TX – April 2, 2014: Specialist Ivan Lopez opened fire at Fort Hood military base, killing three people, wounding 16 others and then taking his own life. He had been prescribed an anti-anxiety drug, antidepressants and other medications to treat anxiety and depression. Side effects include homicidal ideation, abnormal thinking, hallucinations, behavioral changes and suicidal thoughts/actions.
- Washington, DC – September 16, 2013: Aaron Alexis opened fire at the Washington Navy Yard, killing 12 and wounding eight before he was killed by police. Alexis was prescribed an antidepressant. Side effects include homicidal ideation, aggressiveness, irritability, mania and akathisia.
- Aurora, CO – July 20, 2012: James Holmes opened fire at a movie theater during “The Dark Knight Rises,” killing 12 people and wounding 70. He was on an antidepressant and an anti-anxiety drug. Side effects include homicidal ideation, hallucinations, agitation, anxiety and behavior problems.
- Seal Beach, California – October 12, 2011: Scott DeKraai, a harbor tugboat worker, entered the hair salon where his ex-wife worked, shot and killed her and seven others and injuring one. He was prescribed an antidepressant and a “mood stabilizer.” Side effects include homicidal ideation, aggressiveness, irritability, mania and paranoia.
- DeKalb, Illinois – February 14, 2008: 27-year-old Steven Kazmierczak shot and killed five people and wounded 21 others before killing himself in a Northern Illinois University auditorium. His girlfriend said he had recently been taking an antidepressant and anti-anxiety drugs, but had stopped taking the antidepressant three weeks before the shooting. Toxicology results showed that he still had a trace amount of one of the anti-anxiety drugs in his system. Side effects include homicidal ideation, suicidal ideation, hallucinations and unusual changes in mood or behavior.
- Omaha, Nebraska – December 5, 2007: 19-year-old Robert Hawkins shot and killed eight people and wounded five before committing suicide in an Omaha mall. Autopsy results confirmed he was under the influence of an anti-anxiety drug. Side effects include homicidal ideation, confusion, depression, mania and agitation.
- Red Lake, Minnesota – March 21, 2005: 16-year-old Jeff Weise shot and killed his grandfather and his grandfather’s girlfriend, then went to his school on the Red Lake Indian Reservation where he shot dead 5 students, a security guard, and a teacher, and wounded 7 before killing himself. He was on an antidepressant. Side effects include homicidal ideation, suicidal ideation, hostility and psychosis.
- Columbine, Colorado – April 20, 1999: 18-year-old Eric Harris and his accomplice, Dylan Klebold, shot and killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 26 others before killing themselves. Harris was on an antidepressant. Side effects include homicidal ideation, agitation, depression, suicidal thoughts or behaviors and mania. Klebold’s medical records remain sealed.
- Springfield, Oregon – May 21, 1998: 15-year-old Kip Kinkel murdered his parents and then proceeded to school where he opened fire on students in the cafeteria, killing two and wounding 25. Kinkel had been taking an antidepressant. Side effects include homicidal ideation, suicidal ideation, hostility and psychosis.
While there is never one simple explanation for what drives a human being to commit such unspeakable acts of senseless violence, one common denominator has surfaced in a percentage of cases—prescribed psychiatric drugs which are documented to cause mania, psychosis, violence, suicide and in some cases, homicidal ideation. Those with a vested interest will continue to champion the use of such drugs, as the psychiatric-pharmaceutical drug industry rakes in $80 billion a year through psychiatric drug sales alone.
It is long past time that government healthcare agencies launch an investigation. Moreover the New York bill which would have required law enforcement to report any use of mind-altering psychiatric drugs prescribed to those who committed violent criminal acts should be reintroduced.
None can argue against the fact that disclosure would serve the public interest. Except those with a vested interest in keeping the public in the dark.
