8 minute read
Competitor of Stridex
California Matters
Bullet train project given a reprieve
In 2019, just weeks after being inaugurated as California’s governor, Gavin Newsom issued what many took as a death knell for the state’s troubled bullet train project.
“But let’s be real,” Newsom told legislators in his first State of the State address. “The current project, as planned, would cost too much and respectfully take too long. There’s been too little oversight and not enough transparency.
It seemed as though Newsom wanted to finish the initial phase in the San Joaquin Valley and then give up on a statewide link between the San Francisco Bay Area (and perhaps Sacramento) and Southern California.
The reaction from project supporters, particularly construction unions, was swift and sharply negative and Newsom claimed that reporters misinterpreted his intentions.
He insisted that he wasn’t abandoning a statewide system, but wanted to concentrate first on completing a working portion in the San Joaquin Valley. That limited goal, however, also has vexed the governor as costs continued to rise and work slowed to a crawl.
Seizing on Newsom’s words, President Donald Trump’s administration tried to claw back a nearly $1 billion federal grant for the project that predecessor Barack Obama had awarded. When Joe Biden became president, the grant was restored.
Last year Newsom asked the Legislature to appropriate the $4.2 billion remainder of a $9.95 billion bond issue that voters approved in 2008 to build the system, but legislative leaders balked, saying, in essence, that it would be money down a rathole and would be better spent on local and regional transit projects.
Dan WaLtErs
Summary
California’s much-troubled bullet train project has gotten a reprieve with a political deal to free up $4.2 billion in bond money but it still faces years of uncertainty over its fate.
n See WalterS, page A5
Letters to the Editor
Failed presidency
EDITOR:
By now I think almost everyone who is paying attention has come to the conclusion that our disgraced former president was more interested in fomenting the Capitol riot than trying to restrain it. As someone who swore allegiance to protect and defend our Constitution, I never expected to experience a president who took that same oath and ignored it to, instead, build a cult of personality to defend himself.
My hope is that most of Mr. Trump’s supporters have come to the same conclusion as many of his staff — that his self-interest far outweighed any loyalty to the Constitution or his country. The disaster of his presidency will outlive many of us, including his lifetime appointees to the Supreme Court.
It is now our responsibility to ensure that we never make this same mistake again.
ROB PURDIE Col. USAF (ret.), Cameron Park
Gun violence
EDITOR: “We must love our children more than our guns, profit or power.” — Cory Booker, U.S. Senator
The Centers for Disease Control has reported that in 2020 there were more than 45,000 deaths due to gun violence with an average of 123 people dying daily.
Those who advocate for unlimited ownership of guns base their justification for such ownership on three arguments. The first, of course, is the Second Amendment. Unfortunately, the language of the amendment is vague. While it does allow for gun ownership, the intent is the formation of militias to protect a nascent nation without a formal military to protect itself against foreign enemies and internal conflict. The focus was not on individual gun ownership. Certainly, the intent was not to allow gun owners to use assault weapons to kill children in their classrooms. I sincerely believe that those who wrote the Second Amendment would be appalled at the carnage taking place in our country.
The second argument is that the more guns we have, the safer we will be. If that were true, with an estimated 400 million civilian-owned guns, we should be extremely safe. As logic would dictate, studies show the opposite is true — that there is a direct correlation between the number of guns and the rate of deaths by gun violence including suicide, accidental deaths, deaths involving domestic violence, mass shootings, etc. The more guns there are, the more opportunity for guns to get into the wrong hands.
The third is a good guy with a gun argument. Because shootings happen so quickly and usually last only a few minutes, a good guy with a gun can rarely get there before multiple people have been killed and wounded. In addition, a handgun is not much use against a person with an assault weapon in a bulletproof vest. In a recent study of 433 mass shootings, only 22 were stopped by a good guy with a gun and only 12 of those had no military or police experience.
The choice is ours, to continue to lose 123 people a day to gun violence or to finally do something to keep guns out of the wrong hands. To put an end to this madness, please contact your representatives in Congress and urge them to enact the laws necessary to stop the carnage and to vote for candidates who will also support stricter gun laws. No right is absolute, including freedom of speech. Gun ownership should be for those who can prove they are sane, law-abiding and responsible enough to own a gun.
SCOTT TAYLOR Placerville
We’re burning up
EDITOR:
Record heat waves in America and Europe endanger millions, as wildfires rage, in a brutal manifestation of man-induced global warming.
Each of us can reduce our personal contribution by cutting back on consumption of animal foods, which account for a whopping portion of “greenhouse gases.” Carbon dioxide is released by burning forests to create animal pastures. Methane and nitrous oxide are released from digestive tracts of cows and sheep and from animal waste pits.
In an environmentally sustainable world,
n See letterS, page A5
Guest Column
COVID shutdowns renew interest in school choice
At least the pandemic had a silver lining.
It taught parents that there are better alternatives to government schools.
When COVID hit, bureaucrats in control were eager to close schools. Many closed them if just one child tested positive, even though COVID is little threat to kids.
Union teachers seemed eager to be paid not to work. Los Angeles teachers secured a contract that states they will “not be required to teach classes using live video conferencing,” and won’t be required to “provide instruction more than four hours a day.” Nice work if you can get it.
More than a million parents chose to leave the government system. They spent their own money to educate their children in private and religious schools.
Others tried home schooling.
Many had been skeptical but now discovered that their kids learned more and their family life was
enriched by teaching at home. The education establishment sneers at home schooling, but home-schooled students, even though they are more likely to be poor, score 30% higher on SATs. They also do better in college and are less likely to John stossEL drink or do drugs. Finally, even within government systems, school choice grew. Kansas and Missouri expanded access to charter schools. Georgia, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Iowa, South Dakota, Utah and Tennessee expanded Education Savings Accounts, which help parents try private schools. Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey signed “the most expansive school choice legislation in the nation.” It gives money to families that they can spend on private school, home schooling, micro schools, tutoring or any other educational service that meets the needs of kids. Any kid can qualify. The state simply gives the family what they would have spent in the public
school (up to $7,000). That’s much more generous and simpler than other states choice plans.
In San Francisco, voters recalled three school board members. Apparently voters did not like that they kept public schools closed and, instead of figuring out how to reopen, obsessed over renaming schools called Washington or Lincoln.
In Virginia, voters rejected governor Terry McAuliffe after he said, “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.” His opponent, Glenn Youngkin said, “Parents should be in charge of their kids’ education.” Youngkin won.
“For far too long in K-12 education, the only special interest group has been the teachers unions,” wrote the Reason Foundation’s Corey DeAngelis in The Wall Street Journal. “Now, there’s a new interest group — parents. They are never going to unsee what they saw in 2020 and 2021 and they’re going to fight to make sure they never feel powerless when it comes to their children’s education again.”
Of course, union leaders hate the choice movement. American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten calls it racist. “The real ‘pioneers’ of private school choice were the white politicians who resisted school integration,” she wrote. Today’s choice programs are “polite cousins of segregation.”
But that’s nonsense.
“Don’t tell me school choice is racist,” said Denisha Merriweather, founder of the new group Black Minds Matter. “(Choice opponents) are implying that parents, especially lower-income, Black parents, should stay trapped in public schools that have failed their children for decades ... We need a new system ... empowered by parents.”
School choice increases diversity,
