“California is the epicenter of new ideas and research, with the laboratories and the universities,” Rep. John Garamendi (D-Walnut Grove) said in an interview Friday. “That’s where you want the patent office, where you can have the interaction.”

This week, Garamendi joined 46 other California House members and both of the state’s senators in a delegation letter urging Patent and Trademark Office Director David Kappos to “consider” locating one of the satellite offices in California.

After all, the lawmakers note, Californians lead the nation in the patent derby. Last year, 30,080 patents went to California inventors, amounting to one-quarter of the nation’s total. New York, the second-ranking state, lagged far behind with 8,095 patents.

The America Invents Act, signed into law by President Barack Obama in September, authorizes the creation of two new patent offices, each in a different state, in addition to one in Detroit, Mich. The new offices are meant to reduce some of the huge existing backlog on patent applications. However, they may not even open for another three years.

U.S. Rep. Ben Luján, who proposed an amendment to the law requiring its economic impact to be taken into effect when choosing a location for it, joined the rest of the New Mexico Democrats in Congress in calling for a USPTO branch in central New Mexico. Congressional delegations from other states including Colorado, Texas and Hawaii have also asked for an office to be located in their state.

California is the home of a disproportionate amount of the country’s high-tech innovators, but the New Mexico delegation cited inexpensive property values and affordable cost-of-living as reasons to choose the Land of Enchantment, things which can’t be said about Silicon Valley.

A spokesperson for the USPTO told McClatchy that the office is expected to employ about 125 people.

A 2008 California law prohibits slaughterhouse operators from allowing nonambulatory hogs to remain with the herd. Instead, the operator must immediately “humanely euthanize” and remove the animal. This differs from federal law which requires animals that are lying down to be removed and inspected, but allows such animals to continue to slaughter, depending on circumstance.

The National Meat Association, which sued on behalf of the pork industry, points to the potential financial hardship of culling hogs that are uncooperative or transport-stressed, and has asked the High Court to strike down California’s edict on grounds that it over-stepped the federal rule.

Although a federal judge initially sided with the industry and prevented the state from enacting the law, Judge Alex Kozinski of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals summarized that decision as “hogwash.” In the unanimous three-member opinion, Kozinski said states have always had certain authority regarding livestock and slaughter.

In effect, the district court reasoned that states may ban the slaughter of certain species, but once a state allows a species to be slaughtered, it cannot impose further restrictions. Hogwash.

States aren’t limited to excluding animals from slaughter on a species-wide basis. What if a state wanted to ban the slaughter of a specific breed of pig but not the entire species? Or to allow wild dogs and horses to be slaughtered, but not domesticated companions? And what if, in response to a population problem, a state only banned the slaughter of female cattle? Or, perhaps due to ethical concerns, prohibited the slaughter of pregnant or newborn animals, or the slaughter of non-free-range animals? Regulating what kinds of animals may be slaughtered calls for a host of practical, moral and public health judgments that go far beyond those made in the [Federal Meat Inspection Act]. These are the kinds of judgments reserved to the states … Federal law regulates the meat inspection process; states are free to decide which animals may be turned into meat.

The Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), which contains the Wholesome Meat Act of 1967 and the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, is the law that overseas the U.S. process for slaughter, provides inspection services and so-forth.

In its brief, the National Meat Association highlighted operations at a California slaughterhouse that processes roughly 7,700 hogs each day.

A number of hogs delivered to this California facility become nonambulatory during transit, and approximately 225 per day become nonambulatory while awaiting slaughter. For hogs, this symptom (being nonambulatory) is usually temporary and happens for a variety of reasons, most of which are benign. Some hogs become stressed or fatigued during transit and, therefore, cannot or will not stand or walk upon arrival. Others become unable to do so, or refuse to do so, only after being removed from the truck and while awaiting slaughter. As required by the regulations … these hogs are separated and held for inspection. The vast majority of nonambulatory pigs are merely overheated, stressed, fatigued, or stubborn and, if allowed to rest, will stand and walk unassisted. Those pigs are routinely passed by the inspectors for slaughter and human consumption. Others, however, are actually sick or diseased, and are removed from the food supply.

The organization also argued that many diseases or sicknesses that impact hogs need to be evaluated while the animal is still alive. Through the process that exists, they argue, federal inspectors are best able to track disease and pull entire lots of animals that may pose a risk to the food supply or may expose other lots of livestock.

The federal ante-mortem inspection regime thus protects both the animal industry and human health by preventing or limiting the spread of disease and keeping diseased animals out of the food supply, while at the same time allowing those animals passing inspection to be humanely use for the purpose for which they were raised, as food for human consumption.

The California law was passed by state lawmakers after a 2008 whistleblower video by the Humane Society of the United States showed nonambulatory cows being sent to slaughter. The aftermath was a massive beef recall and a 2009 federal order that expressly prohibits any such cows (but not hogs or other livestock) from being slaughtered for human consumption.

But opponents of the California measure say that a downed cow, which can be showing symptoms of mad cow disease, is quite different from a hog.

Attorneys for HSUS, which was instrumental in passage of the California law, argue that there has been a general absence of federal and state humane regulations, which has been made more dire by vertical integration within the livestock industry.

Most pigs who go down do so for reasons that begin long before the animals arrive at the slaughter facility. As one industry article explained, “[t]he packer is at the mercy of the pigs’ experiences prior to arriving at the plant.” The so-called “fatigued pig syndrome” is a convenient label invented by the industry to justify the number of animals who become nonambulatory for reasons the industry cannot or does not want to explain — likely due to factors of mass production, grueling long-distance transport, and injury that the industry has freely chosen to make an integral part of the business of turning pigs into meat. The best scientific article on the subject concluded in 2008 that nonambulatory pigs suffer from a laundry list of physical and systemic problems, including bone injury; painful foot and leg problems; respiratory, kidney and liver disease and dysfunction; and infection.

In addition the group argues, the industry’s assertion that such nonambultory pigs need to be given time to rest “conceals a grim reality.”

Federal regulations require that nonambulatory pigs be segregated, but they do not usually become nonambulatory in convenient locations where they can be given food or water and allowed to rest in place. And slaughterhouse personnel who want to move a 300-pound nonambulatory pig, either to slaughter or to a segregated area to “rest,” have simple choices. They can induce the pig to walk by applying pain and/or brute force in some form. And they can push, drag or otherwise maneuver her using heavy machinery.

As members of Congress explained when debate proposed legislation in 2001, “[t]hese animals, known as downers, suffer beyond belief as they are kicked, dragged, and prodded with electric shocks in an effort to move them at auctions and intermediate markets en route to slaughter.” (statement of Rep. Ackerman) “It is practically impossible to move these animals humanely, so they are commonly dragged with chains and pushed around with tractors and fork lifts.” (statement of Rep. Morella) “[H]umane euthanasia is the only reasonable solution. It is civilized to oppose needless animal cruelty and inexcusable to allow it to continue.” (statement of Rep. Kelly)

Noncompliance teports from USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service show that slaughterhouse employees have used a wide range of techniques in an effort to move or deal with downed pigs. The operators have:

• dragged nonambulatory pigs with ropes
• dragged pigs by their ears
• dropped pigs from bone-breaking heights
• caused pigs to be trampled
• run over pige with heavy machinery
• dumped pigs in “suspect” pens where they were without food and water

The full merit briefs from the National Meat Association and non-state respondents (HSUS) are available. All briefs can be viewed on the American Bar Association’s preview site. Supreme Court justices are expected to take up the case this week.

Iowa remains the number one pork producing state in the nation, and the top state for pork exports. At the end of of 2008, according to the National Pork Board, there were 8,300 hog operations in the Hawkeye State and roughly 19 million hogs being raised here at any given time. Iowa producers marketed 37 million hogs in 2008, or roughly 30 percent of all U.S. production.

The state’s pork activity generates nearly $950 million in household income for pork producers, 39,000 jobs directly related to raising and caring for livestock, and a contribution of nearly $5 billion to the state’s economy, according to the Iowa Pork Producers Association.

Texas, the home of Republican presidential candidate Gov. Rick Perry, has had the most net government job growth since the start of 2007, adding 76,000 federal, state and local government jobs. The increasing public sector workforce is a partial explanation for the “Texas miracle” that Perry has touted on the campaign trail.

California has lost the most government jobs, a net total of 116,600.

The following graph from the St. Louis Federal Reserve, which shows total government employment in New Mexico since 2007, reveals that public-sector jobs in the state have been decreasing since they peaked in 2010 while the U.S. Census was underway.

Government job losses have been a nationwide trend in the past year, due in large part to state governments cutting spending in order to balance their budgets. New economic growth figures released by the Commerce Department today show that U.S. Gross Domestic Product grew at an annualized rate of 2.5 percent over the summer, a slight increase from earlier in the year. However, the increase came in spite of  state and local government budget cuts, which reduced total government spending by 1.3 percent and were a net drag on GDP growth.

This graph shows the rate of change of all government vs. all private sector jobs in the United States since the start of 2011.

As the graph shows, 2011 has been a year of slow but steady increases in private sector jobs, which have been offset by a persistent decline in the number of government jobs. While New Mexico and other states have increased the number of government jobs, it hasn’t been enough to make up for other states’ huge public sector job losses.

CitizenLink leans on high-profile religious-right attorney and Republican National Committeeman James Bopp Jr. to make the case against disclosure.

“We are certainly going to pursue the case vigorously, because the result of the judge’s decision is going to literally be a free-fire zone when we talk about the court sanctioning harassment of people who participate in our democratic process,” Bopp said. “Absent the prospect of protection in future cases, I think the whole idea here by the homosexual lobby is they now have a threat. They [will seek the names of donors] and put them on the Internet. So they already know they’ve got a weapon of intimidation, and without the courts’ protection, they’ll continue to use it.”

The ruling upholding California’s campaign finance disclosure laws was handed down by U.S. District Judge Morrison England Jr. on Thursday. California requires political campaigns to disclose the identity of anyone who donates more than $100.

During the 2008 heated Prop 8 campaign, gay-rights websites like Californians Against Hate that opposed the ballot initiative posted information such as the names, addresses and employers of donors to the campaign. In Washington state a similar proposal saw the same kind of websites appear. There, the sites included Whosigned.org and Knowthyneighbor.org.

CitizenLink refers readers to the conservative think-tank Heritage Foundation’s report on harassment against Prop 8 supporters. Heritage authors placed the harassment into three categories: vandalism, hostility and slurs, and violence and threats of violence.

Vandals also hit houses of worship. Perpetrators used orange paint to vandalize a statue of the Virgin Mary outside one church. Offices at the Cornerstone Church in Fresno were egged. Swastikas and other graffiti were scrawled on the walls of the Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church in San Francisco, a parish known widely as being “gay-friendly.” In San Luis Obispo, the Assembly of God Church was egged and toilet-papered, and a Mormon church had an adhesive poured onto a doormat and keypad. Signs supporting Prop 8 were twisted into a swastika at Our Lady of Perpetual Help Catholic Church in Riverside. Someone used a heavy object wrapped with a Yes on 8 sign to smash the window of a pastor’s office at Messiah Lutheran Church in Downey.

In a previous ruling on the matter, Judge England pointed out that, if there were crimes committed by supporters of either side of the debate, they could and should be prosecuted. He said, as for the rest, the heated exchanges were part of the political process and weren’t reason to limit the ability of Californians to fully inform themselves on an issue they were being asked to decide at the ballot box.

Bopp plans to appeal England’s decision once the written version is made available for review.

California, Pennsylvania and New York had a higher number of mass layoff actions than Florida. The Bureau of Labor Statistics explains that “each mass layoff involved at least 50 workers from a single employer.” The bureau indicates that “employers took 1,495 mass layoff actions in September involving 153,229 workers, seasonally adjusted, as measured by new filings for unemployment insurance benefits during the month.”

The agency indicates the “number of mass layoff events in September decreased by 92 from August, and the number of associated initial claims decreased by 12,318. Florida had 78 mass layoff actions in August, well below June and July levels.

The bureau also reports (.pdf) that Florida had the sixth highest number of initial claimants for unemployment insurance in September behind Illinois and North Carolina, even though the Sunshine State had more mass layoff actions than those two states.

The bureau defines an initial claimant as “a person who files any notice of unemployment to initiate a request either for a determination of entitlement to and eligibility for compensation, or for a subsequent period of unemployment within a benefit year or period of eligibility.”

According to the mass layoff summary, with 376 seasonally adjusted events, the manufacturing sector was the most affected by mass layoff actions through September.

Last week, the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicated that Florida had the largest over-the-month increase in employment adding 23,300 jobs, followed by Texas and Louisiana.

As chairman of the board and president of the Foundation, Bush is working at the national level to support the implementation of choice, competition, school vouchers and testing.

Bush said on Al Punto that laws need be changed in all 50 states to ensure students have access to digital learning, an important issue for the Foundation.

“There are barriers to digital learning, but content must and can be much better than what students currently receive,” Bush said. “There is a lack of good teachers in many places, especially in urban districts. In my opinion, part of the solution is the use of existing technology.”

According to Education Week, a recent U.S. Department of Education analysis based on 2009-10 data from 2,200 school districts shows that teachers in schools where the majority of students are African-American or Latino are “paid significantly less—approximately $2,500 per year.”

The Foundation for Excellence in Education held its National Summit on Education Reform last week; the goal was to offer “an opportunity for lawmakers and policymakers to learn the nuts and bolts of reform.”

Bush was joined on Al Punto by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a Democrat who supported his state’s recent approval of the California DREAM Act.

Bush added that in order to make sure more Hispanics and other minorities make it to college, “we need to listen to the mayor,” adding that local reform to include everybody is necessary. Bush said there is a nationwide understanding that children’s expectations must be increased.

Bush said there is a philosophy that says that recent immigrant Hispanics cannot learn, and if “we reduce [children's] expectations we will get those results.”

Villaraigosa said schools must be reformed, “money must be invested where problem exists” and “we must have the most effective teachers.”

Wednesday, 90 days after California Gov. Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 48 in to law, was the last day to file 504,750 valid, signed petitions with the state. Stop SB 48 organizers announced their failure to gather enough signatures in an email to subscribers titled, “We Fought the Law and the Law Won,” in which they also state plans to keep fighting LGBT-oriented legislation:

While we did not overturn this very bad law, we built a small army of dedicated volunteers that collected an incredible amount of signatures. There will be a next battle. Despite the overuse of the term “tolerance”, there is little tolerance for those who do not endorse the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender lifestyles. And there will be more laws passed that advocate for these and attempt to silence any opposition.

SB 48 opponents will have other opportunities to overturn the law, not through a repeal referendum, but through either a ballot initiative or a constitutional amendment — options which demand even more signatures and, consequently, more money than repealing the law by referendum. Karen England, president of the Capitol Resource Institute and leader of the Stop SB 48 campaign (the two entities share an address), could not be immediately reached for comment.

Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, which has worked with Stop SB 48 to overturn the education law, told The American Independent the effort to overturn SB 48 will continue. Dacus admitted a major obstacle to gathering signatures was lack of money and resources, but he said he was impressed with how far the group got.

“No matter how it turns out, one thing is clear,” Dacus said early Wednesday, when it was unknown whether Stop SB 48 qualified for the referendum. “A broad diversity of parents up and down the state of California actually posed a viable threat to repeal legislation without one dollar paid for signature-gatherers.”

He credited a Los Angeles Times editorial from April for a large part of the public opposition to SB 48. The editorial stated its opposition to the bill based on the belief that educators, not politicians, should write textbooks.

In June, the LA Times published another article on SB 48, claiming groups against the legislation for ideological reasons, such as Catholics for the Common Good, were misrepresenting the paper’s position:

Although the editorial board also opposes the bill, it’s not because these additions would shatter a child’s image of marriage. It’s because the board doesn’t want to see education politicized. In other words: Politicians shouldn’t be in the business of writing textbooks.

Dacus said he opposes SB 48 because it amounted to indoctrination of California’s children and because it is based on subjection, politics and speculation.

“This legislation requires subjective speculation of who in history [was] engaged in homosexual conduct. It will necessitate speculation of who in history was allegedly homosexual or transgender or not,” he said, claiming that a high school in Los Angeles has attempted to “pigeonhole” Abraham Lincoln as a gay man.

In part, the law states:

This bill would update references to certain categories of persons and additionally would require instruction in social sciences to include a study of the role and contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, persons with disabilities, and members of other cultural groups, to the development of California and the United States.

Dacus told TAI the new law forces schools to teach students “only positive things” about LGBT history, but, as written, the legislation prohibits “materials that reflect adversely upon persons because of their race, creed or sexual orientation.”

Asked about the provision of the law that requires inclusions of historical contributions from persons with disabilities, Dacus said: “No one based upon their disability, gender, race or orientation shall ever be excluded [from] history because of those factors.”

Rick Jacobs, founder of the Courage Campaign, a multi-issue advocacy group based in Los Angeles, told TAI he was not surprised that Stop SB 48 failed in its first repeal attempt, and he compared the groups in charge to “rightwing fringe groups equivalent to the Westboro Baptist Church.”

“The entirety of this campaign has been about lies and fear,” Jacobs said.

He said Courage Campaign enlisted 15,000 people to monitor Stop SB 48 signature solicitors throughout the state. The group has filed a complaint against Stop SB 48 with the state attorney general after one monitor discovered a campaigner trying to attract signatures by claiming the petition was to prevent child molestation.

Watch the video:

Advocacy group Equality California has also filed a complaint with the state’s ethics board in protest of Stop SB 48′s campaign practices.

“We’re going to remain vigilant,” Jacobs said. “If [SB 48 opponents] decide to try again, we will be there.”

“We do not Have Enough Signatures,” read the headline of newsletter emailed to SB 48 opponents by the Stop SB 48 campaign. Stop SB 48 is based in Sacramento, Calif., and is associated with the Capitol Resource Institute (CRI), a conservative state policy group that encourages churches to influence public policy.

In its 17th letter in a series of last-minute appeals, Stop SB 48 organizers admitted they are short the number of signatures needed — 504,760 — to qualify for a referendum before the law is implemented next January.

Ever since the education law passed this summer, Stop SB 48 has been emailing subscribers for help and money on an almost daily basis. On Tuesday, the group emailed supporters saying they anticipated having enough signatures by the Oct. 11 deadline, but two days later, organizers said that, due to improperly filled-out petitions, “If we had to turn in today, we failed.”

An example of the campaign’s desperation was evidenced by a text American Independent reporter Mikhail Zinshteyn received from the organization on Thursday. Zinshteyn had no prior knowledge of or communication with the group, but he does have a California cell phone number. The text he received read:

Subject: Stop
Homosexual & Transgender training in schools www.StopSB48.com to Download, Sign, Stamp & Send Petitions that will Voter Veto SB48

But even if Stop SB 48 is able to scrape together enough signatures in the next four days, more problems will likely arise, this time with California’s Fair Political Practices Commission.

On Monday, Equality California, the state’s largest LGBT-rights organization, filed a complaint (PDF) with the Fair Political Practices Commission, asking the agency to investigate whether three organizations connected with referendum campaign have violated the state’s campaign finance law.

The three organizations called out include Stop SB 48; the Capitol Resource Center, to whom the the Stop SB 48 website and campaign materials are registered and addressed; and the Pacific Justice Institute.

In the complaint, Equality California Executive Director Roland Palencia suggested that, because of its high amount of campaign activity so far, Stop SB 48 has likely raised and spent enough money that would require the organization to register with the state as a political committee.

“They are raising and spending funds specifically for the purpose of qualifying a referendum,” Palencia wrote. “As you know, organizations that raise or spend funds for political purposes are political committees and incur filing obligations. Such reporting is essential for the public to understand the sources of funding behind statewide ballot measures. In addition, their coordinated campaign with Stop SB 48 likely constitutes unreported in-kind contributions.  This violation obscures the source and nature of Stop SB 48’s support.”

Both the Capitol Resource Institute (CRI) and the Pacific Justice Institute have denied the allegations, framing them as a political maneuver to thwart a repeal of the new law.

“They are grasping at straws,” CRI CEO Karen England told TAI. ”I have no idea where they got most of what they are accusing us of. … They didn’t wait for our filings to get the facts straight.”

England said invidual donations to Stop SB 48 have not amounted to more than $5,000 and neither have expenditures; thus disclosure would be unnecessary at this point, and the group plans to file at the end of the month. She also disputed Equality California’s other allegation, that CRI has failed to report as a lobbyist employer. England said CRI has not had a lobbyist on staff since 1997.

The point of the complaint is essentially to find out what they don’t know, California Equality spokesperson Rebekah Orr told TAI.

“Their activities seemed to indicate violations,” Orr said. “The question is what do they have to hide? People who are considering signing this petition deserve to know who is sponsoring that effort.”

When asked how much money the campaign has raised so far and which organizations have donated, England told TAI to wait for the campaign disclosure reports at the end of this month.

Orr also noted that the the separation between CRI and Stop SB 48 is unclear. Nowhere on Stop SB 48’s website is there reference to CRI, and Orr said the same thing about SB 48 mailers; yet the site is registered to Capitol Resource Family Impact, which is CRI’s legal arm. Although England claims she is volunteering for Stop SB 48, she still receives a paycheck (PDF) from CRI, which shares a mailing address with the referendum campaign.

Orr also said that Stop SB 48 has been untruthful about the bill they are trying to repeal, claiming that it will force all California schools to to endorse transgenderism, bisexuality, and homosexuality, which she said is not the case.

Napolitano called Secure Communities “a program that helps ICE identify those who have been arrested by state and local law enforcement for non-immigration state or local crimes, who are also in the country unlawfully. It bestows no additional authorities onto local law enforcement and only identifies those who have been booked into jails. Literally, in jails.”

Opponents of Secure Communities have repeatedly called on the Obama administration to end the fingerprint-sharing program because immigrants who have committed no crime are being detained and deported, leaving behind U.S.-born children and families that, in many cases, will struggle to make ends meet.

Jonathan Fried of We Count!, a South Florida worker and immigrant advocacy organization, said during an event in August that in Miami-Dade County, as of May 2011, close to 60 percent of undocumented immigrants who have been detained under Secure Communities have not committed a crime.

Napolitano said Secure Communities “got off to a bad start.”

“We did not explain clearly how it works and who is required to participate,” she said. “It has already helped accomplish a great deal toward ensuring that we use our enforcement resources where they do the most good.”

Over the summer, three state governors — in Illinois, New York and Massachusetts — announced they were suspending their participation in Secure Communities. Members of Congress have called on California Gov. Jerry Brown to suspend the state’s participation in Secure Communities.

U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi told the Spanish-language La Opinion — an online news outlet — that deporting undocumented immigrants who have not committed a serious crime, something she accepted is happening with Secure Communities, is a waste of taxpayer money.

According to Napolitano, “Secure Communities hasn’t increased the number of individuals who are removed, but it has helped change the composition – helping ICE to dramatically increase the number of convicted criminals and egregious immigration law violators,” adding that, “despite the misleading commentary about this program, it has proven to be the single best tool at focusing our immigration enforcement resources on criminals and egregious immigration law violators.”

Pablo Alvarado, director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, responded to Secretary Napolitano’s speech today with the following statement:

We are happy to hear Secretary Napolitano mention S-Comm and “termination” in the same sentence. Despite the political spin and marketing campaign to defend a failed program, S-Comm has proven to be a disastrous policy for our nation and for our communities. It should be ended before it leads to the further Arizonification of the country.

Napolitano said termination of Secure Communities “would only weaken public safety, and move the immigration enforcement system back towards the ad hoc approach where non-criminal aliens are more likely to be removed than criminals.”

Napolitano said it is her department’s job “to listen and make adjustments consistent with our best law enforcement judgment. That’s why Secure Communities now has new training for state and local law enforcement, and additional steps are being taken to protect witnesses, domestic violence victims, and victims of other violent crime.”

The National Immigration Forum, ”a vocal and vehement critic of the Secure Communities program,” was invited by the Department of Homeland Security in July to participate in a task force “created in response to growing criticism and concern” about Secure Communities.

The Forum resigned from the advisory committee in September, stating that despite recommendations “that – if implemented – would improve the operation of the Secure Communities program and strengthen civil rights and civil liberties protections,” they “fell short of sound policy recommendations that would cure fundamental flaws in the program.”

The amendment is part of an ongoing campaign to amend California’s constitution to grant equal civil rights to fetuses, effectively criminalizing abortion. Due the language, the amendment would explicitly ban abortions even in the case of rape, incest or fetal anomaly.

The language submitted to the attorney general reads:

The California Human Rights Amendment recognizes the inherent human rights, dignity and worth of all human beings from the beginning of their biological development as human organisms – regardless of the means by which they were procreated, method of reproduction, age, race, sex, gender, physical well-being, function, or condition of physical or mental dependency and/or disability.

“Human personhood is the final chapter of the Civil Rights movement,” said CCRF founder and President Walter B. Hoye II in a statement. ”It proposes commonsense values for otherwise convoluted jurisprudence. From the pre-born child, to the senior citizen facing end of life decisions, to the disabled veteran, we believe all human beings should be protected by love and by law. This is the end game. Personhood is what the Pro-Life movement looks like victorious.”

Other groups sponsoring CCRF’s personhood efforts are Lila Rose, who has led the movement to abolish Planned Parenthood through her organization Live Action; Bishop Ron Allen, president of the International Faith Based Coalition; Samuel Rodriguez, Jr., president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference; and Jason Jones, president of the Human Rights Education and Relief Organization, who also runs an organization called Bella Hero, which distributes “Bella” DVDs to crisis pregnancy centers, mostly to those run by Care-Net and Heartbeat International.

On CCRF’s website, the origins of the group are explained by the birth of one of Hoye’s children: “God used the premature birth (six months, 2.1 pounds) of his son to teach him that the fetus is a person, a living, breathing human being.”

The personhood movement has gained traction throughout the country this year with personhood-amendment petitions active in every state. Mississippians will vote on whether or not to add a personhood amendment to their state constitution next year.