Letters to the Editor: Edison's shareholders, not its customers, should be replenishing wildfire fund
Bill Waxman, Simi Valley
..
To the editor: Help me understand economics and politics: Southern California Edison profits for 2024 came in at $1.69 billion, an increase of 9.8% from 2023. The total compensation for Steven D. Powell, CEO of SCE, was $3,950,818 in 2024. The total comp for Pedro J. Pizarro, CEO of Edison International, was $13,809,571 for 2024. But they want customers of SCE to help pay for wildfire damage? All through a minimum increase some of us need to help feed our families. Instead, why doesn't the governor concentrate more on rooftop solar, which would lower those consumers' monthly costs and help prevent wildfires?
Kenneth Brown, Pasadena
..
To the editor: Newsom's plan to pay for fire damage is shortsighted because it doesn't address the root causes of the Eaton and other fires. Had we not dumped tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, we wouldn't be so frequently stuck with billions of dollars in damage.
Looking forward, making electricity more expensive discourages investment in heat pumps, electric vehicles and other clean technologies. The big polluters are all of us with gas cars. But the governor is right in that California needs new revenue to pay for past and future damage.
A better solution is to make polluters pay for the damage they cause, which is right in the name of Senate Bill 684/Assembly Bill 1243, the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act of 2025, authored by Sen. Caroline Menjivar (D-Panorama City) and Assemblymember Dawn Addis (D-Morro Bay). Of course, profitable fossil fuel companies will object, but lawmakers with guts should be told to care about those of us who breathe this air — and our grandchildren, who will suffer more if we stay on our same polluting path.
John Schaefer, Santa Rosa
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
5 hours ago
- Washington Post
Thomas Chatterton Williams is impossible to disagree with. That's not a good thing.
Thomas Chatterton Williams and I disagree on practically everything — race, progressive politics, social media, so-called cancel culture, how much one person should be allowed to quote Camus — and even when I ostensibly agree with him (such as our shared belief in not censoring objectionable ideas from past art), I find that his ideas are often presented without rigor, and his prose often tedious, to the point that I want to disagree with him anyway.
New York Post
6 hours ago
- New York Post
Why moderate Dems scapegoat Bibi, Dems should drop green energy and other commentary
Conservative: Why Moderate Dems Scapegoat Bibi The left's 'anti-Israel litmus test is creeping into the mainstream' of Democratic politics, warns Commentary's Seth Mandel, as 'non-crazy Democrats' deal with how 'the 'genocide' lie has gone from opinion to gospel' among much of the party's base. Running for cover, some 'Democrats believe that if they criticize Netanyahu forcefully' over the war, 'they can fool primary voters into thinking they are condemning Israel.' But pro-Israel Dems have been trying this ever since Obama left office,' and jumped on it big when the Gaza war began. Advertisement 'This, in other words, has been Democrats' Plan A. If the party is already out of ideas' for escaping extremists' censure, 'the fate they fear is pretty much inevitable.' Politics desk: Dems Should Drop Green Energy Facing their 'lowest approval ratings in recent memory,' Democrats should 'reconsider some of their least popular positions,' explains Joel Kotkin at UnHerd, and start 'preparing to jettison Joe Biden's 'Green New Deal,'' which 'hurts middle- and working-class families by raising prices for housing, electricity and gasoline,' and is 'out of step with [the party's] once-reliable working-class base.' Yes, 'any shift back toward fossil fuels will meet ferocious opposition from progressives and their green allies,' and the most likely 2028 candidates look 'set to continue the policy of their green agenda while punishing the 'carbon economy.'' Advertisement Yet 'without a broader shift, Democrats risk alienating working-class and minority voters who bear the brunt of high energy costs.' 'To rebuild its coalition, the party must balance environmental goals with economic realities — or face further political decline.' Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Libertarian: Newsom, Bass vs. Housing 'California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass are doing their best to ensure that no new net housing is created during the rebuilding of Los Angeles' wildfire-ravaged neighborhoods,' marvels Reason's Christian Britschgi. Advertisement The pair 'issued twin executive orders' suspending 'a state law allowing builders to build duplexes on single-family zoned properties' or to subdivide lots — a law explicitly enacted 'with the goal of enabling more small-lot starter homes and 'middle housing' in the state's lowest-density areas.' But 'local governments have actively limited its effectiveness' and now Newsom and Bass have 'bent' to another 'local pressure campaign' over fears of 'enabling builders to profit off of the wildfire rebuilding efforts.' From the left: The Times' Atrocious Turn Charlie 'Savage and his colleagues at the [New York] Times have badly miscovered this story for nearly a decade, and continue to do so,' fumes Racket News' Matt Taibbi of a Columbia Journalism Review piece praising Savage's latest effort to downplay the latest revelations of chicanery in manufacturing 'Russiagate.' Savage seems 'laser-focused on setting up a legal defense against perjury charges for [former CIA chief John] Brennan' by 'arguing an absurd semantic point' about Brennan's lies about how he promoted the fictitious Steele Dossier as valuable evidence. Advertisement The Times won a Pulitzer for reporting that's now proved completely 'wrong and embarrassing'; 'isn't it time someone at the Times stepped outside the bubble, and took a hard look back?' Labor beat: Autoworkers Want Their Union Back The storied United Auto Workers union was 'hit hard' by the loss of manufacturing jobs and 'forced to look to other industries' for members, notes Frannie Block at The Free Press. Now, blue-collar workers are 'outnumbered by a hodgepodge of white-collar defense attorneys, librarians' and other left-leaning professionals. That's produced a 'chasm' between union veterans 'who are moving toward the political right' and newcomers whose roots are in 'campus activism.' Labor 'traditionalists' are 'uncomfortable' with 'an increasing embrace of the ideals of the far left,' including 'campaign ads supporting . . . Zohran Mamdani' and advocacy for Gaza. 'DSA members' who have never 'worked a day in an auto factory' now occupy leading roles in the UAW. — Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Democrats draw up plans to retaliate if Republicans gerrymander Texas — but they face legal hurdles
Democrats in America's two biggest blue states are hatching plans to respond in kind to a mid-decade move by Texas to draw a friendlier House map for Republicans. Retaliation threats have come from California Gov. Gavin Newsom and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, who lead states where Democrats control large legislative majorities. Two can play at this game, they say, vowing to similarly eliminate GOP-held seats in their states. But that's easier said than done. Democrats have legal hurdles to clear in California and New York, which have restricted partisan gerrymandering, which liberal advocates pushed in previous years in the name of good government. Texas has no such limits, so GOP Gov. Greg Abbott has called a special session to draw a new map. California eyes a 'triggered' map for 2026 California has an independent redistricting commission — a bipartisan panel tasked with drawing up fair maps for the Legislature to approve — to avoid partisan influence. Newsom is seeking to get around that on a temporary and targeted basis — but only if Texas enacts its GOP-favored map, which is aimed at giving Republicans up to five more seats in the U.S. House. Newsom hopes to work with the Democratic-dominated Legislature starting this month to set up a special election for a statewide ballot measure on Nov. 4. It would offer a newly drawn map if Texas moves forward, a source close to Newsom told NBC News. The ballot measure would do two things: First, it would affirm support for California's independent commission and call for fair redistricting nationwide. Second, it would include a trigger that says a pre-drawn new House map expected to boost Democrats would take effect if Texas implemented a new map. 'What we will say is for the '26, '28 and 2030 elections, these congressional maps on the ballot that voters are approving will be in place. ... The maps themselves will most likely be on the ballot,' said the source close to Newsom, who wasn't authorized to discuss the plan publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. 'After the 2030 election, the redistricting commission does its job again, and we'll redraw starting in 2032.' Newsom said that the maps are 'being processed' and that they will be 'provided in a transparent way to the public,' adding that under the plan, California voters would make the 'ultimate determination.' 'We're not going to roll over. And we're going to fight fire with fire,' Newsom said. 'We also will punch above our weight in terms of the impact of what we're doing. And I think that should be absorbed by those in the Texas delegation. Whatever they are doing will be neutered here in the state of California.' Paul Mitchell, a California-based redistricting consultant who has advised Democrats, said any new House map would be constrained by the Voting Rights Act, as well as the governor's office and the Legislature, which would need to greenlight it. 'It's like having an emergency 'break glass' rather than an emergency 'burn down the house' measure,' Mitchell said, adding that voters support the independent commission and believe it should be replicated nationwide, in an ideal world. 'They're angry about what Texas is doing. They want to fight back,' he said. 'Voters can understand our long-term goal is this path of better democracy. If we do something, it's only because Texas did it. If Texas steps down today, then all this hubbub of redistricting in California goes away.' How many Republican-held House seats could Democrats flip by drawing a new and friendlier map in California? 'The threshold is three, four or five seats,' Mitchell said, adding that a tangential goal would be to fortify Democrats in existing competitive seats and not do a 'dummy-mander' that might expose other Democratic lawmakers to problems. New York may have to wait until 2028 In New York, changing the redistricting process must move forward as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment — a lengthy and arduous exercise that probably wouldn't lead to new congressional maps until the 2028 election cycle, even if Texas acts before the upcoming midterms. 'I wish I could just call a special election and change it. I'd do it in a heartbeat,' Hochul said recently on MSNBC's "All In with Chris Hayes." 'But we have a constitutional amendment process that's required first. I'm willing to do that. I'm working hard with our legislative leaders to pass legislation immediately — as soon as they return in January — pass it in this current session of the Legislature, go to the next one, which is required, so it won't be until 2027 we can get it on the ballot. But what would that mean — is that in 2028, we could have different lines.' That's because the state's redistricting has been controlled for more than a decade by its own independent redistricting commission. New York voters passed a constitutional amendment changing the redistricting process back in 2014 to create the commission; previously, the Legislature controlled the entire process for legislative and congressional maps. The new proposed amendment would return the duties of redrawing congressional districts to the Legislature — but only if another state engaged in mid-decade redistricting first. Because it's a proposed constitutional amendment, it would have to pass the Legislature in Albany in two consecutive sessions — this year and again in 2026 — and then still be approved by voters in a ballot measure in the subsequent year. That means that whatever new maps that would be created wouldn't be in effect until the 2028 elections at the earliest. 'Otherwise, we have to wait until 2032,' Hochul said, referring to the decennial census process. 'And heaven help our country to find out what'll happen with that length of time.' Democratic legislators in Albany acknowledged that the payoff would be delayed, but they said advancing the measure is still crucial, as long as Texas Republicans continue to advance their own. 'It's still worth it,' state Sen. Pat Fahy, a Democrat, told NBC News on the sidelines of the National Conference of State Legislatures annual meeting in Boston on Tuesday. Fahy said it was 'really unfortunate' that New York Democrats felt forced to change years of precedent. 'But I'm willing to do it, because so much is at stake,' she said. 'This is about Congress, and it is about control, and it's unfortunate, but we have to do what we have to do.' Responding to questions about the obstacles and delays, state Senate Deputy Majority Leader Michael Gianaris, who introduced the bill in his chamber, said in an email, 'What Texas is attempting is a perversion of our democracy and cannot be allowed to stand without a response.' 'This battle will not be over in 2026 and it behooves us to ensure New York is in the game if other states will be enacting off-cycle redistricting,' he said. This article was originally published on Solve the daily Crossword
