Re “Why Mayor Ed Lee mattered beyond San Francisco – especially in Sacramento” (sacbee.com, Dec. 12): If Sacramento has a crisis with affordable housing now, that crisis will be 10 times worse if we are sucked into a “mega-region” with ultra-pricey San Francisco. The only ones to gain from this crazed agenda are land speculators, real estate developers and City Council members purchased by the aforementioned groups. The Bee dreams of new readers and advertisers. The rest of us get more traffic, noise, pollution, crime, plus higher prices and disrupted neighborhoods.
Kevin Coyle, Sacramento
Fix for DACA
Re “‘Dreamers’ must be saved, but not by Democrats holding government hostage” (Editorials, Dec. 7): Thank you to the Bee’s Editorial Board for saying Congress should pass a legislative solution for “Dreamers” before they lose protections from deportation. I will add that this is not a matter that can wait. With no action, beginning March 6, more than 1,700 DACA recipients will start falling out of status per day. Administrative actions could take months after the legislation has been enacted – months that tens of thousands of DACA recipients will be out of work and at risk of deportation. Equally important, Congress will vote on a year-end budget bill by Dec. 22 that will include funding for immigration enforcement. If protections for “Dreamers” are not passed this year, those funds will be used for deportations. That’s why it is urgent to get a permanent, bipartisan solution passed before the holidays.
Yolo County Supervisor, District 2, Davis
‘Dreamers’ at risk
Last week, The Bee downplayed the urgency for Congress to pass legislation to protect “Dreamers” because “DACA doesn’t expire until March.” That is a dangerous misconception that fails to acknowledge that more than 12,000 “Dreamers” who have already fallen out of status and are at risk of immediate deportation. Thousands more will be in the same situation before the March deadline. Passing a bipartisan solution before the end of the year will ensure that we move as quickly as possible to restore work opportunities and protection from deportation. And it will give the Department of Homeland Security sufficient time to implement legislation before DACA recipients start lose their status in even greater numbers.
Cathy Rodriguez Aguirre, Sacramento
Re “‘It was like dirty dancing’: Colleagues say Sen. Bob Hertzberg hugged them inappropriately” (sacbee.com, Dec. 13): I feel like I need to shower off after another one of these sexual predator stories. But I also feel like one fine fella, never, ever having come anywhere close to violating a woman in such a way. Recently, me and some old high school buddies tried to imagine not considering women as equals as far back as the early 1960s.
William J. Hughes,
Re “Jerry Brown to Trump: ‘Get out of the way’” (sacbee.com, Dec. 12): Along with French President Macron, Gov. Brown is right that we have not yet begun to to turn the corner in addressing climate change – and things are likely to get worse before they get better. Nowhere is that clearer than in California, recently plagued with drought, flooding and fire. Climate deniers ignore not just the science but also damages from climate change.
So far, our cap-and-trade program has priced carbon at about $14 per ton. California needs to charge more. We would all pay more for polluting energy, but our children would face a better future.
John Schaefer, Arcata
Feel good lawsuits
Re “17 ways California sued the Trump administration in 2017” (sacbee.com, Dec. 11): After reading The Bee’s summary of 17 of the 22 lawsuits filed by California against the Trump administration, my opinion is that the majority – if not all – of them will go absolutely nowhere. If I’m right, what will be the cost to California taxpayers for losing frivolous, feel-good and go-nowhere lawsuits?
Re “California looks at dumping gas tax for per-mile fee as cars use less fuel” (sacbee.com, Dec. 8): Revenue from numerous gas tax increases has been diverted to the general fund and various pet projects. What would be different about a tax paid at the pump with a different name?
GOP tax plan
Re “Republican tax deal is a monstrosity” (Editorials, Dec. 13): Why is OK for Donald Trump to push for and approve changes to tax code when he has not released his tax returns? As a taxpayer, I want transparency. I want to see how these changes would benefit his income and businesses.
Something smells very rotten with this bill. Why reduce taxes for wealthy earners when they are also getting a major windfall from eliminating the estate tax? Why not instead keep important middle income deductions for tuition, medical bills, and state and local income taxes? It is unacceptable for our president, who has bragged about taking advantage of tax loopholes in the past, to be involved in creating more cuts for himself and other rich people without us knowing how much he will benefit. Why is this allowed?
Chris Paros, Sacramento
Re “Mom died in 1993, but her daughter kept cashing her Social Security checks for 24 years” (sacbee.com, Dec. 12): The saga of Dorothy Griffin cashing her deceased mother’s Social Security checks for 24 years made me wince. This woman went out of her way to defraud all taxpayers and line her pockets with government – public – funds. The charges brought against her, as well as her “punishment,” were laughably lenient. The court said her behavior was an anomaly and it did not expect her to break the law again. How reassuring. Crime pays, big time.