Letters to the Editor |

Letters: Recall is sound | Wasting time, money | Surge and schools | Reduced incentive | GOP’s bad take | A worse problem

A correction to an earlier version of this article has been appended to the end of the article.

Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

Recall doesn’t equate
to voter suppression

Re. “What’s at stake in California’s governor recall election,” Page A6, Aug. 4:

It is pretty disingenuous for the anti-recall crowd to compare this recall to voter suppression. I see ads on TV too saying the people that want to recall the governor are just like the people that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6.

California has been a blue state dominated by Democrats for a while now. They had every opportunity to change the recall laws if they thought they were so bad. Californians went through legal channels and followed all the rules required to get the recall on the ballot in a legitimate manner, so I don’t see how Democrats can claim any illegal behavior.

In fact, it was only when they realized that people have achieved what they needed to that they started changing laws to favor Newsom. That should be the real story here.

Max Ritter
Livermore

Don’t reopen schools
amid new COVID surge

It is certainly best to stop all in-person learning and go back to a 100% remote learning model at this point in time. With the delta, lambda and any number of lesser-known COVID variants here, reopening the schools at this point is most ill-advised by all measures. The delta variant alone is more than twice as infectious as the original COVID virus, according to the CDC. The situation has changed gravely so we must change our tactics to combat the virus as well. Failure to do so is suicide.

We must stop the infectious and poisonous tidal wave of big-money politics from the all-powerful business community that is forcing us to make all of the wrong decisions for our children’s health and safety.

There are more important things in life than the almighty dollar. The safety of our children is one of them.

Michael Alvarado
San Jose

Reducing solar incentive
hurts green energy push

Re. “California’s plans to change incentives for rooftop solar draw backlash,” July 24:

I am one of the hundreds of thousands of Californians who have invested in rooftop solar. Installing solar has allowed me to help diversify California’s energy grid with clean sustainable energy. Meanwhile, net energy metering (NEM), the energy policy that pays solar users for power sent to the grid, has made solar investment affordable.

For decades, Californians have been paid for the solar they produce but don’t use. Our mutual goal is to migrate to renewable fuels, such as solar, to manage environmental issues, to continue to make electricity affordable, and to meet the state’s increasing needs. Now, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is considering slashing NEM benefits for homeowners creating solar rooftop energy. The CPUC must recognize what most Californians already know – that NEM is key to getting more homeowners like myself to install solar and reduce our carbon footprint.

Jackie Fahrner
San Jose

GOP take on socialism
narrow and unhelpful

Michael Hiltzik’s article, “Why GOP calls everything it opposes radical socialism,” (Page A7, Aug. 4) is spot on. As a historian of Europe, I am quite familiar with the history of socialism – a label that covers many different initiatives to promote social and economic justice.

The GOP frenzy about socialism seems to relate only to the Marxist-Leninist strain, which asserted the need to capture and control “the means of production.” But there are many other less radical approaches to actually benefiting the common good through mobilizing public resources. These include (in the United States) public schools, interstate highways, the national postal service and Social Security programs. These can include medical assistance, child care assistance through family allowances, and many other publicly useful benefits.

The GOP leaders should do their historical homework and stop blindly opposing government programs that can benefit so many. Such ignorance is unattractive, wrongheaded and ultimately dangerous.

Karen Offen
Stanford University, Clayman Institute for Gender Research
Woodside

‘Hansonness’ is graver
ill than ‘wokeness

After reading Victor Davis Hanson’s op-ed piece on “wokeness,” (“What the move toward wokeness is all about,” Page A9, July 30) I thought I’d do some research and discover what Hansonness might encompass.

Hanson defended the Iraq War and praised George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld. Hansonness is militarism (as opposed to diplomacy).

He wrote The Case for Trump, praising Trump for “uncouth authenticity.” Hansonness is Trumpism.

He blamed President Obama for “deliberately (whipping up) much of the current division in the country.” Hansonness is anti-Obamaism.

He wrote a column, “Facing Facts about Racism,” and his father advising him that when he went to San Francisco, “be careful if a group of black youths approaches you.” Hansonness is racism.

Finally, he is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a columnist published in many journals: His income must be more than the most “woke” liberals.

Steve Matusow
Emeritus faculty, Evergreen Valley College
San Jose