we seeing more lobbying money from larger groups focusing on state legislatures? one of the things i think we can both agree -- congress is pretty much deadlocked -- you are not going to get any controversial or big name issues through congress. we can see -- moving their money away from congress and towards state legislatures where they can get things that they may? want >> i think, in broad terms, we do. we certainly are seeing an increased focus and an increased recognition of the importance of these issues or these matters. as well, you look at something like the debate over something like critical race theory, 18 states now have passed some sort of restriction or prohibition on what might broadly be called crt, defining crt is a whole other battle, as you know -- abortion, again, we talk about 13 states with almost total prohibitions -- dependent on how you characterize -- it about the same number number -- with -- type restrictions. i think those pivotal issues do encourage groups with -- to involve themselves, to a greater extent. >> i would -- some of thes

host: are we seeing more lobby money from larger groups focusing on state legislature? i think we can both agree, congress is pretty much deadlocked. you are not going to get anymore controversial or big-name issues through congress. do we see these groups moving their money away from congress and towards state legislatures where they can get changes they may want? guest: in broad terms, we do. we are seeing that increased focus and increased recognition of the importance of these issues or matters. you look at something like the debate over critical race theory. 18 states now have passed some form of restriction or prohibition on what might broadly be called crt. defining crt is another battle, as you know. abortion, we talk about 13 states with almost total world missions, 14 dependent on how you characterize it. about the same number with very tight restrictions. i think those typical issues do encourage groups with interests to involve themselves to a greater extent. host: i want to get a little deeper into some of these issues. i want to remind our callers they can

in a case like moore is justice, saying the word legislature so obviously meaning legislature and not legislature constrained by a constitution that it does not matter that the fact of the original public meaning of legislature was something different. and those that ratified it did assume that it would include legislature or did he -- is he saying that the original public meaning, as the text would have been understood, was that the eight court could not have constrained the legislature even if the practice was to the contrary. i am just trying to understand methodologically when it is that justice thomas thinks the meaning is clear that we do not have to look to history at all area because the meaning should be obvious. >> i do think he means the original meaning and not just the way the text strikes us in isolation and what we would assigned to the text today should be controlling. and it's always going to be a difficult question. there is something paradoxical saying that that meaning is clear and another justice that is disagreeing with you. it is a contradiction. it is possible

the theory of the legislature is the idea that the state legislature can act in congressional and presidentialelections and can't be constrained by its own courts and can't be constrained by state constitutions and the supreme court on that question was 6-2 so the justices rejected this idea and it's important if we think back to 2020 when trump was trying to reverse and get the states legislatures to come up with those alternatives it was based in part onin this they the legislatures had this power that they could ignore the votes of the voters. that didn't happen and now that the door has been closed but there is a part number two. the supreme court said in the last part of its opinion and this waser chief justice roberts republican appointed judge, justice cavanaugh also republican appointed conservative judge joined by the liberals on the court in saying that the state courts when they are interpreting state constitutions or legislations or state statutes can't irrigate the power of the legislature so what does this mean? ifdi you can gain the interpretation the supreme court thinks has go

the theory of the independent state legislature is the idea that the state legislature can act in congressional elections and presidential elections and it can't even be constrained by its own courts. and it can't be constrained by state constitutions. and the supreme court on that question was 6-2 in rejecting the theory. one justice didn't express the view on the merits of the case. just thought it was moot and it shouldn't have been heard. so six justices rejected this idea and it's really important if we think back to 2020 when trump was trying to reverse the results of the 2020 election, he was trying to get state legislatures to come up with those fake electors, it was based in part on this theory that these state legislatures had this power and that they could even just ignore the votes of the voters. that didn't happen. fortunately in 2020. and now that door has been closed. so that's kind of part one of moore v. harper and that is very good news. but there's a part two. so the part two is that the supreme court said in the last part of its opinion, and this was chief justice roberts, r

. - this will determine the validity of a legal idea called the independent state legislature theory. the theory says that the state legislature has an unlimited independent power to set election rules without being subject to review by state courts. conservative lawyer, former judge michael luttig says that moore v. harper is, quote, "the single most important case for american democracy since the founding of the nation". is there merit to that statement, david? - i will say it's extremely important. i'm not going to go to the founding of the nation, but it is extremely important because we're going to be moving into a 2024 cycle where if, let's say donald trump loses again narrowly, this issue is going to be front and center in the united states of america. and i don't think it's an overstatement to say that there are circumstances in which literally the continued unity and social peace of the country uld depend on the outcome of the independent state legislature doctrine. so this is, judge luttig was right, this is massively important. i don't know if it's more important than, say,

it was a rule for what the north carolina legislature wanted which was to say that the legislatures had untroubled power. without checks and balances in the state constitution or the court of governors. but more broadly, the times when they made a ruling that i thought was a positive one, like i said, the voting rights act, they just kept the law in place. and one of the good things they did was it comes after a decade in which the supreme court has really weakened the voting rights act. but putting aside those two cases, they have been moving aggressively and carefully. both in this term to continue pushing the courts to the right with a theory of how to read the constitution, that, is itself. and it was because pretty radical. they last year in june cramped three days, and three days they crammed in decades of conservative social policy. they were acting in this respect less like a court and more like a political body. i think that one of the reasons we see is that for the consequence of that, the public trust in the supreme court has collapsed. to the lowest level ever recorded in th

the legislature has free reign. the other backdrop of the case was another provision of the constitution, the presidential election clause with says each state shall appoint in such a manner as the legislature dictates, the number of electors. the question is, the lurking question was, if the elections clause gives the legislature plenary power, what does that mean for the presidential election and they're concerned about the 2020 election and litigation from that and the 2024 election. there were various standards advanced in the case. one is the legislature can do whatever. the second was the legislature is bound by procedural requirements, the majority requires legislative action and governor has to sign a bill in order for it to become law. but not substantive restrictions in the state constitution. third, the legislature is bound by the state constitution but there may be some federal oversight of how the state's highest court interpret the constitution. finally, no federal role at all. a 6-3 majority. it was s

there is a french theory called independent state legislature.ded up not being so french because a lot of states were republican-led states were seriously considering it. the legislature could vitiate the election results, throw them out and not have to deal the states own courts and essentially deciding who want an election a. this is significant because in a way ila wonder if it ever come o the supreme court in the first place even 10 years ago. i batted down the theory to call the election results to matter what they voted for. >> i can talk about cases for 25 years. with people like you. this is the most complicated one of them all but let me take a minute and try to explain what this is all about. there's a lot of misunderstanding about this case. the constitution says that when it comes to congressional elections, state legislatures get to set the, rules. subject to congress o override. and for presidential elections the state elections good to set the rules. that's article two of thef constitution. congress is not good to pass legislation

at issue in moore versus harper was not the independent state legislature about the electors clause of the constitution. that was the issue in the 2020 presidential election. but the operative language in the two constitutional provisions is identical in all material respects, and therefore there is every reason to believe that the court will reject the independent legislature theory in the context of the electors clause. >> ok. just making sure everybody is muted for this discussion. go ahead. >> the independent state legislature was the centerpiece of president trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election. in the final phase of the plan, it was the independent state legislature theory that would have permitted the state legislature to transmit fake electoral states for donald -- fake electoral slates for donald trump. that plan was always not simply illegal but unconstitutional. moore versus harper drove the nail in that coffin, so that is not even a plausible argument to make going forward into 2024. >> professor tribe? >> in driving the nail into that coffin, it also reenergized t

the legislature has free reign. the other backdrop of the case was another provision of the constitution. the presidential electorate clause that says each state shall appoint in such a manner as the legislature if they direct in number of directors -- blah blah blah. the lurking question was if the elections clause gives legislature plenary power what does that mean for the presidential electorate clause? there is lots of concern about the 2020 election and the 2024 election. there were various standards advanced in the case. let me pick through them. one is legislature can do whatever nothing in the state constitution's binding. legislature is bound by procedural requirements. the governor has to sign a bill in order for it to become law but not substantive restrictions in the state constitution. third, the legislature is bound by the state constitution but there may be a little bit of federal oversight of how the state supreme highest court interprets the constitution. no federal role at all. the court, a 6-3 maj

first, the independent state legislature theory and the more case. >> yes. more versus harper is now and will forever be the most important case in american history for america's democracy. the twin reasons through the rejection of the independent state legislature theory, the court defined for the first time in history how federal congressional elections will be conducted hence going forward. it was not the independent state legislature theory provided to the electors because of the constitution. that was the issue in the 2020 presidential election. the operative language in the constitutional provisions is identical in all material respects and therefore, every reason to believe that the court will reject the independent legislature theory in the context of the electors clause. >> okay. okay. yeah, i am sorry. just shutting this off. just making sure everyone is muted for this discussion. go ahead, judge. >> yes. the legislature theory was the centerpiece of president trumps efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. in short, in the final phase o

many states have the legislature draw the lines.ome states have independent redistricting commissions. we have a hybrid. we have a redistricting commission that draws the lines, they sent it to the legislature, and if it legislator doesn't like, it the redistricting commission does it again. they do it twice and then if the legislature wants, it can draw the lines. that's what happened last time. those were challenged by a republican, they brought a case in upstate new york before a republican judge, and that judge was upheld in declaring that there was a gerrymander, that the seats -- the lines were too partisan. the high court sent the issue to a special master, who came from pittsburgh, appointed by this republican judge, who had no connection to new york. he drew the lines that were very unsatisfactory, and actually, much more partisan than the original alliance. so those were the congressional lines that we used in 2022. the democrats have now argued that that was fine for 2022, but we really need to go back to the redistrictin

then forgets about it whether the legislature at the federal or the legislature at the state level and it's up then to the executive branch to try and manage it as efficiently and as effectively as can. and they run into all constraints that the law brought with it into the process the administration that coolidge is talking about, i think is a concern that the bureaucracy seems to grow willy nilly and as was pointed earlier, he worked with with due diligence and aggressively to reduce the number of departments that he had, the size of the departments were there. and i think you'll find in america, across most executive branches, not all, but most executive branches and governors, republican and democrat, they're pretty determined, not to let this monstrosity of a blob continue to grow without any kind of regulation or control. yeah, and the governors comments fit with something that judge jones was talking about earlier. you do get a lot of legislation that's passed and then there's a delegation to executive offices to interpret and implement and it's often you're fighting against the

the republican-led legislature now wants change.io will hold a special election. there's only one issue on that ballot. whether future amendments to the constitution will instead need the approval of 60% of the electorate. now you might be wondering why ohio republicans are suddenly concerned about the percentage of votes that it takes to amend the state constitution. there is a cynical motive behind this effort. in november, ohio voters will decide whether to enshrine abortion rights into the state constitution, which polina shown, 59% of ohio and support. ballot measures have become the new front in the state level battle over abortion rights when the supreme court overturned roe v. wade last year. so far, since roe is overturned, every time abortion rights of input to a popular vote on the state ballots in red, blue, and purple states alike, voters have chosen the side of abortion rights. it's not a coincidence that a few months before ohio was set to vote on an abortion rights measure that is supported by 59% of the states regis

through our state legislature-— some cases through our state legislature.look at the bigger picture we've seen _ legislature. look at the bigger picture we've seen a _ legislature. look at the bigger picture we've seen a planet's. picture we've seen a planet's hottest month ever recorded. i know after he got into office you signed a pledge to combat climate change in san antonio and your city about can summer is likely is still be prevented as we are seeing global record—breaking heat waves? i think we need to do what we can to mitigate it. and you what we can action on climate. i mentioned again that we are pending the use of coal in san antonio a0 years ahead of schedule in recognition of that ability and our responsibility, but we also doing things to mitigate the impacts that are here and part of the new reality. he pleaded illness calls for emergency response through a 50%just calls for emergency response through a 50% just this year and last year was also record—setting year so we have to do things and protecting people now and that is what we're doin

report sending it to the legislature and the governor. the document dives in to help california reparations should work for descendants of black american slaves and those in the black community who've experienced racism and that reparations. the final recommendations report comes following a two-year period featuring more than a dozen task force hearings and thousands of testimonies. when you heard individuals testify. >> i could hear my ancestors talking to the assembly member reggie jones. sawyer is one of the members who said on the task force and helped draft up the final report. i was extremely impressed because it is a definite blueprint of what you need to do when it comes to harms foisted on anybody. the document received a lot of attention for its recommendation that the legislature consider what are described as down payments for descendants of anyone who was a black slave. in addition to those in the black community whose ancestors arrived before 1900, if the descendants meet a certain criteria for the wrongs they've endured, c

the joint legislature chose the second option, surprise surprise.ith a district that is less than four tenths african american. i'm not a math girl, but i do know enough to know that 38% is well short of a majority. earlier this week, alabama's senate president pro tem said i know the process has moved through the three judge panel and then to the supreme court, and they have given an order that we need to redo the map, so here we are. it doesn't mean we're excited about it, but we're going to do our job. what it didn't say is that he isn't doing what they were ordered to do. here's why. a second black majority congressional district in alabama would jeopardize the republican majority in the united states house of representatives. which explains why speaker kevin mccarthy called alabama republican legislature -- legislators and told them he is concerned about maintaining his house majority. joining me now is evan milligan, executive director of alabama forward, and a plaintiff in merril v. milligan, which challenged the alabama maps. and attorney ma

so far this year, more than 520 anti lgbtq bills have been introduced in state legislatures. that is a record. more than 220 of those bills, specifically, targeted transgender and non-binary people. also a record. and an unprecedented 70 anti lgbtq laws have been enacted just this year. in the past, we have put together pride specials celebrating lgbtq+ individuals and their achievements, first in the white house and then on the stage and screen. achievements that deserve to be celebrated. but tonight, as that progress is threatened like never before, we are going to do something different i am jonathan capehart and welcome to msnbc's defending pride. for the next hour we are going to highlight the brave people fighting this hate, refusing to back down and make sure that their rights are guaranteed, no matter how hard the bigots try otherwise. i will speak with marty gold cummings, the drag star who is defending their art form from criminalization. state representatives -- embryonic to tone who are defending their voices in platforms in state legislatures. raven's ammonia and

, because legislature means legislature. presidential election has been held can change its mind and flip the election, and give the victory to trump rather than biden, and that legislature cannot be constrained by a state court. that is the very strong version of the theory. the court rejected that. it is an important opinion that begins by reaffirming the principle of judicial review, which goes back to madison. it proceeded the framing of the constitution, and was assumed to be central 12 of the framers. the idea that all bodies are constrained by a constitution -- then chief justice roberts runs through the methods of constitutional representation. history and original understanding of expectations as well as practice over time and in all of these cases he says this is a clear case. no one has ever suggested that legislatures would be free of constitutional constraints. on the contrary, state courts did review thes actions of state legislatures and elections at the time of the framing. states passed amendments to their c

guest: the independent state legislature has a lot -- it was a crackpot idea and they should never have taken the case. it would have been the esteemed conservative judge, it was the most important cases -- if the rule for what that north carolina legislature wanted, it is a set of the legislating power of the states has unchecked power to set election rules. but the time when they made a ruling that i felt was a positive one, like the voting rights act, they kept the law in place. it was a good thing we did it because after a decade in which the supreme court has weakened the voting rights act, putting aside those two cases, they have been moving aggressively and carefully to continue pushing to the right with a theory of how to read the constitution that is itself new and radical. they are claiming to be originalists. last year in june they crammed in decades of conservative social policy in three days. they're acting less like a court and more like a political body. one of the reasons we see is that the consequence of that is that public trust in the supreme court has collapsed to th

but this new national monument also comes at a time when alabama's state legislature, which of course is rs overwhelmingly republican, alabama's legislature appears poised to do something very very radical. to make sure that black voters in alabama cannot elect representatives of their choice. you may have heard the supreme court of the united states, this may have crossed your radar the supreme court of the united states, you might know right now is a very conservative body. a 6-3 hard right conservative majority on the nation's highest court as we speak. but even so, even that hard line conservative 6-3 court could not swallow the recently decision by alabama's legislature to draw up congressional districts in that state so there's only one black majority district in the whole state in a state where a quarter of the population is black. the high court ordered the state of alabama to make a new map where there are two such districts where black voters might be able to elect a representative of their choice. they have been ordered to do this by the federal courts. alabama is refusing

thisis is a theory, a very radil theory called the independent state legislature theory.honda's quite right, it was promoted by supporters of the former president in the aftermath of the 2020 election to try to tell legislatures that they could ignore the will of the people, they could just appoint electors however they wanted even if it was in direct contravention to how the people voted. and what the supreme court said -- and it waseo a very important case in terms of establishing guard guardrails for 2024 and onward -- three democratically-to appointed justices joined the chief justice and said, no, that's not the case. state legislatures are still subject to the checks and balancesar of their state court systems and their state constitution and the state executive. and if a losing candidate comes to the united states supreme court to expect at the united states supreme court is going to allow a state to anoint the loser as the winner of a presidential election, i think the united states supreme court clearly said don't even bother coming here, we're not going to do th

the policy made by the legislature, my office implements the policy changes. we work with local partners with the registrars and the clerks to foment that. we assist them in doing training for all poll workers. everything will perish is doing the exact same process and the exact same time. maybe not the exact same time but, throughout the day. that makes it efficient. it makes a very transparent. all you have to do is read the election code to understand what these folks are doing. i understand that people don't necessarily want to read the election code. i don't care. i don't like reading the election code. the bottom line is, you know, those who want to think something to various going on is going to believe. that they take things out a contact. i liken it to, they would take very is pieces of pie. coconut, lemon, chocolate, strawberry. they put it in apply plate and they call the pine. now, not possible. that is not a pie. that is not how elections are run. all of the chief election officers, the local county election officers consistently it is always a ma

.— our state legislature. picture, - our state legislature. looking at the bigger picture, we - our state legislature. looking | at the bigger picture, we have seen the planet's hottest month ever recorded and i know right after you got into office you signed a pledge to combat climate change in san antonio, in your city. can summers like this still be prevented as we are seeing global record—breaking heat waves? i think we need to do what we can to mitigate it and also do what we can to take action on climate and i mentioned again we're ending the use of coal in san antonio 40 years ahead of schedule, in recognition of that ability and our responsibility. but we also having to do things to mitigate the impacts that are here and part of the new reality. he related illness calls for emergency response, about 50% just this year and last he was also a record—setting year so we need to do things that are protecting people now agree true that's what we're doing by opening calling stations, we have 80 around town an

and, you know, i do think -- and, again, i'm speaking about new jersey legislature. i do think that they welcome the education because, yes, hay do get the calls, they do get e-mails. and at the time we all weren't experts in the field, so they don't understand what, if anything, is going on. so you just have to continue to make sure that everyone who is interested and genuinely interested is understanding the process. and another good thing that i know that my team and i focus upon are our youth, because if there are naysayers -- and i'm not, i'm coming from a good place of this, but naysayers, you know, we all gonna be gone, i'm going to be the gone one of these days. but we want to ingrain now those students in high school, those students in college and pierce all of this mis and disinformation. make them understand civically and just be education -- the education of what is, indeed, going on with your election process. because when i speak to students, they genuinely want to hear the truth, and they don't want any of the politics in this. they just want to know i

lyrical parties, structure, elections tilde majorities in the legislature and engage in mobile structures and coalitions. the parties do the work of moderate -- modern demonstrative month -- representative democracy. without it we would have a free-for-all or a chaotic mess. host: to the beginning of putting the parties and the rules and how they have changed in politics. guest: the framers didn't like political parties when they were writing the. political parties will cause vision and we need to find a way to organize the legislature without political parties. it turns out when they got into congress, very quickly they realized political parties were essential to organizing legislatures and organizing campaigns. madison, jefferson, hamilton all formed political parties. when you're out of government it is easy to say we should approach every issue independently. when you get into government, assembly election pass bills and they need to start organizing a team and those teams become political parties. you want to run for elections and coordinate among multiple candidates to share brandi

, because legislature means legislature. presidential election has been held can change its mind and flip the election, and give the victory to trump rather than biden, and that legislature cannot be constrained by a state court. that is the very strong version of the theory. the court rejected that. it is an important opinion that begins by reaffirming the principle of judicial review, which goes back to madison. it proceeded the framing of the constitution, and was assumed to be central 12 of the framers. the idea that all bodies are constrained by a constitution -- then chief justice roberts runs through the methods of constitutional representation. history and original understanding of expectations as well as practice over time and in all of these cases he says this is a clear case. no one has ever suggested that legislatures would be free of constitutional constraints. on the contrary, state courts did review thes actions of state legislatures and elections at the time of the framing. states passed amendments to their c

report sending it to the legislature and the governor. the document dives in to help california reparations should work for descendants of black american slaves and those in the black community who've experienced racism and wrongs reparations. the final recommendations report comes following a two-year period featuring more than a dozen task force hearings and thousands of testimonies. when you heard individuals testify. >> i could hear my ancestors talking to the assembly member reggie jones. sawyer is one of the members who said on the task force and helped draft up the final report. i was extremely impressed because it is a definite blueprint of what you need to do when it comes to harms foisted on anybody. the document received a lot of attention for its recommendation that the legislature consider what are described as down payments for descendants of anyone who was a black slave. in addition to those in the black community whose ancestors arrived before 1900, if the descendants meet a certain criteria for the wrongs they've endured,

he will dissolve the legislature to prevent that vote. paine's fellow delegate from taunton thomas leonard, is a loyalist who would certainly tip off governor gage about the impending vote. but paine comes up with a ploy to prevent it. he tells eleanor that an urgent matter requires the immediate removal and presence in taunton. off they go and in their absence, the vote takes place. when gage hears he to promptly dissolves the legislature and massachusetts has its duly elected representatives proceeding to philadelphia thanks to pay on the way to philadelphia, they stop at milford, connecticut, where bob paine says, i suppose you're all curious why i'm the only guy in the carriage who has a middle name. well, let me explain to why i'm called robert treat paine. i'm name for this puritan governor you've probably forgotten. was the governor of connecticut, but he was the guy who saved the connecticut charter from that despot 90 years ago, named governor andros. he was the one that saved the charter and headed in the charter oak tree that r

legislature whose leader at the time was andrews. i was with us tonight even though it's his birthday. oh i take that is a present from john you. and those days colorado still with teetering but it was a red state bill owens whom i met with prior to this meeting was the governor. john was leader of the senate. and chairing the meeting with these influential legislators was my friend steve schuch who is with us tonight. steve is the most generous and dedicated man i know and the past 20 and more years. he's been a great friend and supporter of mine and of the freedom center and of this event. i also want to thank sharon of the leadership program of the rockies, who has an event herself tonight and couldn't be here, but encouraged her to come. the title of my new book, final battle the next election could be the last may seem like high. a ventilation, but in fact it is a sober and disturbing portrait. of where we are as a nation, which is why donald trump has not only endorsed the book, but has it. it's titled final battle to describe

this is a radical theory called the independent state legislature theory.honda is right, it was promoted by supporters of the former president in the aftermath of the 2020 election to try to tell legislators that they could ignore the will of the people and appoint electors however they wanted, even if it was against what the people voted. what the supreme court said, and it was important in terms of establishing the guardrails for 2024 and onward, and a 6:3 vote, said, no, that is not the case. state legislators are still subject to the checks and balances of their state court system and constitutions and estate executive, and if a losing candidate comes to the united states supreme court to expect that the united states supreme court is going to allow a state to anoint the loser as the winner of the presidential election after the u.s. supreme court said, do not bother, we will not do that. host: our next caller is in mississippi, james on the independent line. caller: i wanted to know, sir, about electoral college votes. why did the republican party insi

the notion of the independent state legislature theory was that courts, that the legislatures had theay without any involvement of court review and that's inconsistent with our notion of checks and balances. but it will mean that we will have the ability to go before state courts to look at what legislatures and sometimes gerrymandered legislatures are doing with regard to redistricting and just as in any other case have courts have the final say. that's the way our system is designed and that is what the court affirmed through that -- through the north carolina case. >> the supreme court did warn state courts, federal courts could still overrule on cases involving federal elections. does that concern you? >> no, not at all. i mean, i think you want to have that backstop so that if a state court does something that is, you know, egregiously wrong you want to have the united states supreme court have the ability to come in and correct that wrong. >> i want to ask about affirmative action. in this decision that race cannot be used in college admissions, there was also written by chief j

>> the legislature has to prioritize. >> behavioral health. today he doubled down on his support for 2 bills that he insists, wolf and thousands of much needed shelter beds. capitol correspondent eytan wallace has a look at the proposals. >> well, the governor says these bills are all about getting help to those who need it most. all part of a legislative package for what you the voters could have. the final say. we've got that was a major part of the governor's message as he met with this group of behavioral health advocates, veteran services groups and local elected officials this morning. nice. we need to change during the meeting he voiced support for 2 pieces of legislation going to the legislature, including want to put a 4.6, 8 billion dollar bond measure on the 2024 ballot. the goal he says is to fund up to 10,000 shelter beds for california experiencing behavioral health challenges and homelessness. most importantly, he says the bond will fund new community treatment campuses and facilities across california. the importance the impera