IT’S A GRAY AREA:

I am not a fan of politics.

But I am a fan of addressing the issues of our day. So twice in the last 11 years I took an unpaid leave of absence from my duties as a trial judge and ran for partisan offices. The first time was as a Republican running for Congress against Bob Dornan and Loretta Sanchez, and the second was as a Libertarian running for U.S. Senate against Bill Jones and Barbara Boxer. The first time, I ran to win; the second, I was so concerned about the direction our country was headed, I ran just to be a part of the discussion about the issues.

In neither election was I successful. So now I tell my friends “I am not a politician, and I have the votes to prove it.”

But I still have a desire to discuss issues. So I approached the editors of this newspaper and volunteered to write a weekly column for a year to discuss problems and propose resolutions. They agreed, and now we are halfway through the year — this is the 26th edition of our weekly column.

So far, the response and feedback to the columns have been OK, but not overwhelming.

The two columns that generated the most responses were my recommendation that we convert to the metric system, and that the 11-99 Foundation that supports dependents for fallen CHP officers eliminate the practice of providing license plate frames and wallet ID cards to its donors, with the implication that the donors will be given favorable treatment from the CHP on traffic citations.

Most people were in favor of the metric system, except one who saw it as a conspiracy to take away our individuality. Representative comments were that “Are Americans too ignorant or lazy to embrace new ideas? I say let’s get on with it,” and “The success of the U.S. is often to be found in its willingness to upgrade existing conditions.” One person even recommended we go “hard metric” right away, to forgo a transitional period because it would be less expensive.

The 11-99 Foundation column received expected responses, such as “Shame on this judge for writing such an editorial without a shred of evidence proving any kind of favoritism,” and telling me to “get your facts straight before insulting all CHP officers.” Some CHP officers wrote in support: “I wrote tickets to several drivers racing one time together with their Lambo’s with 11-99 license plate frames and badges, and the corrupt leadership at my office had all of them voided.”

One of those officers was unintentionally supportive when he said, “The 11-99 Foundation frowns upon its donors from seeking favoritism. I have seen them revoke membership from individuals who recklessly use this charities’ good intentions just to avoid a citation. Does it ever happen? Sure. Is it a guarantee? No.” Another officer provided the sobering comment that “I have stopped a number of judges and every single one made it a point to tell me they were a judge.”

Even a local police officer discussed the law of unintended consequences when he said he and others did not particularly like the CHP, so sometimes they tended to give more citations to cars with the 11-99 Foundation license plate frames.

One current CHP officer’s comment matches my experience: “On almost all of my traffic stops I was looking for a reason to not give a citation. It’s amazing how often people made this difficult. {But} I do think the license plate frames are a little much and should be discontinued.”

Finally, I sent a personal letter to CHP Commissioner Mike Brown, with my original column, and requested his thoughts. So far there has been no response, which, unfortunately, says more than he would probably want. But I will give him another chance to defend the practice by sending him a copy of today’s column.

The column about restorative justice received comments that can be divided into two categories. The first is from people who see that prisons do not rehabilitate anybody, but some rehabilitative programs actually do work. Some of them provided first-hand experience. They agreed we should reserve prison space for people we are afraid of, and not for people we are mad at. The second group was concerned about having drug rehabilitation facilities in their neighborhoods.

The column about trying to revitalize tourism in the United States similarly drew two types of comments. One group was concise and said things like “It’s the threat, stupid!” The other group called the threat of terrorism “baloney,” and told me not to pull my punches.

Concerning my critique upon the failure of our welfare system and minimum wage laws, many people said my logic was “severely flawed,” and that “Everyone should have the right and opportunity to earn a living wage. In reality, such laws are a major positive force in every Western society.”

But everyone appreciated my attack on the welfare system for the wealthy.

The most notable comment about the Happy New Year column about prosperity and choice, which centered on the federal government relinquishing much of its accumulated power back to local governments and individuals, was “We do have federalism in this country. Local governments do what the feds don’t control.”

After discussing the increasing problem of childhood obesity, one man suggested we follow the lead of Brazil by planting public areas with fruit and nut trees, which, he said, would provide “a delicious way to fight obesity.” And the column about resolving our nation’s health-care problem by encouraging Medical Savings Accounts drew the discouraging but accurate comment from a doctor that “We are often forced to opt for a less optimal treatment in favor of the insurer’s profit margin.”

The column about illegal immigration drew numbers of responses like: “Take off your rose-colored glasses. People come here and learn quickly how to get free services and food stamps” and “No amnesty. Legal immigrants first!”

In response to the column that government impedes business, one man agreed that beauticians and barbers should not be required to get a license, but went on to ask “why should lawyers be protected with licenses from the competition of others who want to lawyer?”

The column about citizens’ rights and responsibilities, and the lack of support for our veterans generated no comments. That was discouraging.

A response I’m sure many of you agreed with was “Shorter please! Be honest, how many of you actually read the judge’s comments?” Many columns were longer than I intended (including this one), but it’s difficult to address how to resolve complex problems in 800 words. So I appreciate your sticking with me!

America: today and tomorrow

In the weeks of the scheduled year that remain, this column will address issues about how we can improve our public schools through competition; that the biggest threat to our national security is our dependence upon foreign oil, and what we can and must do about it; a suggestion to scrap the Internal Revenue Service and instigate either a national sales tax or what is called the FAIR tax; how we should address mental illness; the critical importance of the separation of church and state; why we should revitalize the hemp industry; and numbers of others.

Throughout this time, I again ask everyone to remember that none of these issues has a “solution.” Life cannot be made to be perfect, and neither are any of my proposals — or anybody else’s. The problems have only “resolutions,” which attempt to do what is best for the maximum number of people, while still protecting minority interests.

The fact remains that this is our government. That means that the things that are not going well today are our responsibility. And what we need is leadership. In my view, we still have the Jeffersons, Washingtons, Lincolns and Martin Luther Kings living in our society today. But we must find them and support them.

Unfortunately, people can be manipulated and misled. I know that is not a popular thing to say, but it is true. That means that we must rely upon our democratic institutions, and upon dedicated and public-spirited leaders, who need our active support and guidance.

Please contemplate these issues and join our discussion of them online at the Daily Pilot or with me by e-mail. I will respond to all messages. Good government begins with our active involvement.

JAMES P. GRAY is an Orange County Superior Court judge and author of the book, “Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It — A Judicial Indictment Of The War On Drugs.” He can be reached at [email protected] or at his blog site at www.judgejimgray.com.