The Pay-to-Play Business Plan

Getting Paid for Referrals Violates State and Federal Rules

Not a Victimless Crime

Instead, Be Good at What You Do and Ask Patients to Refer their Friends

California Democrats are writing a new chapter in their party’s shameful history of racial discrimination against Asian Americans – all in the name of racial equality.

Earlier this month, the state legislature approved two controversial measures that inexplicably target Asian Americans for further discrimination.

The first bill, Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 5 (ACA 5), would ask voters to repeal Proposition 209, the California Civil Rights Initiative, a 1996 constitutional amendment that banned discrimination or preferential treatment in public contracting, public employment, and public education.

Proposition 209 has helped thousands of Asian Americans gain acceptance to state colleges and universities.

For years, top universities, including most notably Harvard University, have discriminated against Asian Americans in their college admissions process by consistently and systematically giving “low scores to Asian-American applicants on personal traits, such as kindness and leadership,” a disturbing fact revealed in the pending lawsuit, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.

Higher education’s systemic discrimination against Asian Americans has occurred throughout the country with one notable exception: California.

Moreover, a level playing field has also helped other minority students.

Gail Heriot, a University of San Diego law professor who co-chaired the 1996 California Civil Rights Initiative campaign, points to evidence that the measure has helped underrepresented minority students excel.

“Immediately prior to the implementation of Proposition 209, only one black student had a freshman-year GPA of 3.5 or better — a single black honor student in a freshman class of 3,268,” Heriot noted in a 2018 journal article. “In contrast, 20 percent of the white students in the class had such a GPA. The next year, with Proposition 209, a full 20 percent of black students could boast a GPA of 3.5 or better after their first year.”

Graduation rates among underrepresented racial minorities have also risen.

Wenyuan Wu, the director of administration for the Asian American Coalition for Education, analyzed two decades of graduation rate data at the University of California system. Four-year graduation rates of underrepresented racial minorities rose from 31.3% during the 1995-97 period to 55.1 % in 2014.

“The 6-year graduation rate has fared even better: 66.5% in 1998 and 75.1% in 2013,” Wu found. “Minority admissions at UC exceeded those of 1996 both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of all admissions.”

And yet Democrats have put repeal of Proposition 209 on the ballot.

Perhaps even more absurd than Democrats’ rollback of Proposition 209 is Assembly Bill 3121, which would create a state taskforce to develop a plan for slave reparations exclusively for African Americans.

The reparations bill effectively forces Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese and Korean Americans, all of whose ancestors were subject to equal if not greater discrimination than African Americans, to pay up.

Let’s accurately remember history: California’s constitution, which banned slavery from the beginning, at one time legalized discrimination against Chinese immigrants.

“No corporation now existing or hereafter formed under the laws of this State, shall, after the adoption of this Constitution, employ directly or indirectly, in any capacity, any Chinese or Mongolian,” reads Article XIX of the California Constitution of 1879 titled, “Chinese”. “No Chinese shall be employed on any State, county, municipal, or other public work, except in punishment for crime.”

The Democrat reparations bill isn’t about fairness, equality, or righting historical injustices.  It makes no mention of the systemic discrimination against Chinese Americans written into California’s Constitution. The reparations bill is simply about catering to the whims of the far left.

The truth is that the California Democratic Party has long tolerated racism and discrimination against Asian Americans.

For example, Democrat schools chief Andrew Moulder fought to keep Chinese-American students, including Mamie Tape, out of San Francisco public schools.

In World War II, Japanese-Americans were victims of Democrat President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066, the shameful internment order that sent 120,000 citizens to incarceration camps, including one at Manzanar, California.

Following the Vietnam War, Democrat Governor Jerry Brown said Vietnamese refugees weren’t welcome in his state — as he tried to stop the federal effort to, in his words, “dump Vietnamese on” California.

And every April 29, Korean-Americans commemorate Sa-I-Gu, the Korean word for the 1992 Los Angeles riots when thousands of Korean-Americans were targeted by rioters under Democrat Mayor Tom Bradley’s watch.

With these two discriminatory bills, California Democrats have continued their sorry tradition of discriminating against Asian Americans.

But Asian Americans voters can fight back — at the ballot box.

“In California, 14 percent of eligible voters are now Asian Americans (nationwide the number is 5 percent),” wrote John Fund, National Review’s political affairs reporter. “By 2050, Asian Americans will account for a tenth of the nation’s voters and at least a fifth of California voters.”

Come November, Asian American voters must make their voices heard.

Shawn Steel serves as California’s committeeman on the Republican National Committee. 

Pay to play business plan

State and federal rules

Not a victimless crime

Be good at what you do

By Natalie Brunell Beverly Hills
PUBLISHED 1:29 PM ET Feb. 19, 2020

SHARE

BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. — Having attended most of President Donald Trump’s fundraisers in Los Angeles, Shawn Steel, the Republican National Committee member from California is always proud to show off his memories from those visits.  

Steel says he looks forward to the unpredictable nature of the speeches and the high energy of fellow supporters and shared his expectations for Trump’s Beverly Hills fundraiser at the Montage Hotel.   

“The beautiful thing about going to a Trump rally or a dinner is you have no idea. It’s very spontaneous, it’ll be a lot about California,” Steel said.   

Steel says he agrees with Trump’s harsh criticisms of California and of the Democratic policies in Los Angeles.   

“California is deteriorating. You just have to drive down the streets, you have to see what’s going on with the overpasses and the underpasses. And you have a criminal element that’s festering everywhere. The quality of living is at stake in California,” Steel said.   

Even though some of the President’s criticisms of the state have led to his threatening to cut federal aid to various California agencies, Steel says money from Californian Republican donors will continue to flow in the President’s direction.   

In fact, the top beneficiary of California-based campaign contributions in 2019 was President Trump.  

“California is not going to be in the middle of the election, but it’s going to be financing a lot of the election,” Steel said.   

That financing isn’t sitting well with anti-Trump protesters who came to the Montage Hotel Tuesday, including Chantelle Hershberger of Refuse Fascism.  Hershberger had just returned from spending three weeks in Washington, D.C. at the impeachment trial and came to rally outside the fundraiser.  

“These people are the haves, and you know they want to see Trump succeed because it is empowering them,” Hershberger said. “It kind of shines light on the whole corrupted system.”   

Protesters at times clashed with Trump supporters outside the fundraiser venue, but those excited to see the President’s motorcade and shoot clips of it on their smartphones appeared to outnumber the activists.   

As for the concerns raised by protestors, Steel says he doesn’t always agree with what Trump says or how he expresses himself, but he says he’s proud to support the President’s push to raise green all across the blue state.  

February 12, 2020 at 6:30 p.m.

Close to 40% of Americans are obese. That’s over 93 million people, according to the Centers for Disease Control. 100 pounds or more over your ideal weight = morbid obesity.

Today’s story is not a lecture, nor is it intended to be seen as fat shaming anyone.

Rather, a look at a topic, “Often not addressed and filled with prejudice,” as Southern California personal injury attorney Shawn Steel commented when I ran this remarkable fact situation by him.

Doctor is discriminating?

“I just came from my doctor’s office, who is treating me for a really bad whiplash with, back problems and I’m very upset,” ‘Alex’ texted. “I am a victim of weight discrimination, based on what he told me and his attitude. Can we Skype? I want you to see what I look like and tell me if you think his comments amount to illegal weight discrimination.”

Within minutes I was looking at a 40-ish guy in complete denial of his obvious morbid obesity. In reply to my question, “So, what did the doctor tell you,” he stated:

• How dare you come in here drinking a Starbucks overflowing with whipped cream!

• You weigh 350 pounds, had this minor auto accident, but your weight alone is the major cause of your neck and back problems. I warned you about this last time. You have one hour to enroll in our weight management program, come back with proof, and if you do not, consider yourself discharged. I will not see you again.”

Does weight have impact?

A major study published in 2010 looked at the relationship of obesity and vehicular injuries: “BMI and Risk of Serious Upper Body Injury Following Motor Vehicle Crashes: Concordance of Real-World and Computer-Simulated Observations.” 

It concluded that obese men and women—with a high BMI—have significantly greater upper body and back injuries than people of normal weight. The study looked at the bio-mechanics of accidents, In brief, the more overweight the patient, the worse the injury, just what the doctor told Alex.

Our Skype chat

Effect on settlements?

California military bases have taken the lead in the national coronavirus response

California is taking on a big responsibility for coronavirus, but can we really trust the Chinese government to tell the truth about their medical practices? 

When President Trump announced a phase one trade deal with China, it looked like the king of deals had brokered an end to the 18-month dispute between the world’s two biggest economies.

Then came the coronavirus.

Hour by hour, World Health Organization officials are updating the number of confirmed cases and fatalities resulting from the coronavirus. As of this writing, the death toll has surpassed 1,100 – with more than 45,000 cases confirmed in 28 countries and territories, including 13 cases in the United States and multiple cases in California. 

Our armed services have taken the lead in the national coronavirus response with Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in San Diego,  Travis Air Force Base in Sacramento, and March Air Reserve Base in Riverside all acting as coronavirus quarantine facilities.

The full extent of the outbreak remains unclear, but there’s no question that the epidemic – and ensuing response – will have a major impact on the global economy. Airlines have suspended flights to China. Chinese officials have ordered a lockdown of more than 56 million people, who can’t go to work, school or shop. Wuhan, the center of the coronavirus outbreak, is a major manufacturing hub, supplying components for hundreds of US-based suppliers, including Apple, Tesla and General Motors.

“Even if it is potentially contained within the borders of a country or a region, there’s so much global manufacturing and trade that happens in these areas,” Nita Madhav, chief executive officer of Metabiota, a San Francisco company that studies the spread and impact of epidemics, tells VOA News. “And that could disrupt … the manufacturing of different goods and the shipping of them across the world.”

If a trade deal between the two largest economies in the world can be rendered moot by an exotic animal seller at a Wuhan seafood market, it’s an indication that the next round of US-China talks must go well beyond trade to include a hard look at the propaganda, censorship and human rights violations within China’s biomedical sector.

China’s ruthless Communist government quashes all dissenting opinions and censors any content that would cause the public to question the official party line. That includes matters of public health. Initially, Chinese censors ordered journalists to keep the outbreak off the front pages and barred any reporting that differed from the official reports by state-controlled media.

As recently as January 19, Chinese officials were assuring the world that the outbreak was “still preventable and controllable.” And the facts were rewritten to support that story.

The Financial Times reports that hospitals “were given a target of ‘zero infections’ among staff, with hospital deans liable to be fired for failing to meet the target. As a result, medical staff were slow to report infections among nurses.” In some cases, Chinese officials changed death certificates to eliminate any connection between fatalities and the coronavirus.

Even the virus’ origin story – that 2019-nCoV somehow made the jump from animals to humans via the Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market – is being questioned. A new study published in the Lancet reveals data that “suggest the virus, and its spread among humans, took off weeks earlier than Chinese officials said.”

“Understanding a disease’s origin story is important, both because it helps epidemiologists track and prevent its spread and because a virus’s genetic makeup can inform the design of vaccines and treatments,” explains Popular Science. “The details of a contagion’s provenance can also help policymakers figure out how to prevent future outbreaks.”

China’s response to coronavirus isn’t isolated but reflects an endemic failure to adhere to basic standards of medical ethics, human rights and public health transparency. 

Last year, an independent British tribunal chaired by Sir Geoffrey Nice, a former prosecutor at the international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, concluded that China has been engaged in the ghoulish practice of harvesting organs from religious minority groups and political prisoners, primarily members of the spiritual community Falun Gong.

“The conclusion shows that very many people have died indescribably hideous deaths for no reason,” Sir Nice told the Guardian. “There is no evidence of the practice having been stopped and the tribunal is satisfied that it is continuing.”

China promised to end forced organ harvesting in 2015. That is difficult to substantiate due to the country’s censorship and lack of transparency. Much like with coronavirus, there is reason to believe that the government has falsified public health datasets. A study published in the BMC Medical Ethics journal casts doubt on the legitimacy of the government’s official organ donation statistics. 

“They’re too neat to be true,” Matthew Robertson, the study’s lead author told the Guardian. “These figures don’t appear to be real data from real donations. They’re numbers generated using an equation. It is difficult to imagine how this model could have been arrived at by mere chance, raising the distinct possibility that it was intended to deceive.”

For years, the world has ignored Chinese human rights abuses against prisoners of conscience, Muslims, Tibetan Buddhists, Christians, and members of Falun Gong. Now, China’s biomedical practices are a threat to the entire world.

February 7, 2019

It's more common than you might think in personal injury lawsuits, and doctors, chiropractors and physical therapists don't have to stand for it.

Today’s story will be of special interest to two groups of readers who are linked together by what is known as a lien, which I’ll explain in a moment. They are:

(1) People who were injured in an auto accident who lack good health insurance or adequate amounts of auto medical payments coverage but need treatment from a chiropractor, doctor or physical therapist. They hire an attorney to file an insurance claim against the responsible party.

(2) Chiropractors, doctors or physical therapists who provide treatment, and, as Los Angeles based attorney Shawn Steel adds, “contractually — on a lien basis — agreeing to wait for payment of their services when the case is settled.” 

An Enforceable Contract

Specializing in personal injury cases and representing chiropractors for over 35 years, Steel explains that a lien, “It is a binding, enforceable, written contract signed by the patient, attorney and health care provider requiring bills to be paid from the proceeds of settlement prior to the individual receiving any funds.”

But he was quick to point out, “That’s how it is supposed to work. It is what the law requires, but in my experience, over three-quarters of lawyers who handle personal cases on a lien basis flagrantly refuse to honor the lien, and far too many health care professionals just don’t know what to do when they are stiffed, or their bill is cut to shreds.”

The recent example of our client, “Dr. S.” is typical.

‘My Polite Requests to Pay Our Bill was Ignored!’

The Lawyer Is a Fiduciary – Do Not Let Anyone Browbeat You Down!

Get it in writing.

Be persistent.

• Send a demand letter to the lawyer with a seven-day deadline. Attach the lien, your report and bill. In your letter state, “I am sure you are familiar with the Rules of Professional Conduct.”
• On the eighth day, file a complaint with the state’s Bar Association, send the attorney a copy of it and file your suit in Small Claims Court.

“You will get paid — and, if it goes to court, judges almost always rule in favor of the doctor,” Steel concludes.

Advice for Clients/Patients Caught in the Middle