Letters for November 3, 2016
Dirty democracy
Re “Last woman standing” by Rachel Leibrock (SN&R Editor’s Note, October 27):
To arrogantly assert that the national election is “rigged” is an affront to our democratic process. Moreover, it insults the intelligence and dedication of millions of Americans who invest their time and energy at the polls to ensure our voices count on Election Day. I have volunteered at the polls. I now join the legions of Americans callously denigrated and personally offended by Donald Trump. Several expensive pieces of hit mail were sent recently to Chico voters by well-financed conservative PACs. These mailers use distorted and misleading statements to smear the reputation of dedicated, hard-working, responsive and reasonable city council members running for re-election. This lamentable campaign tactic has been employed since time immemorial. Unfortunately, it works well to muddy reality and detract from important civil discourse and meaningful debate. Are we really willing to accept this dirty brand of democracy? I hope not. Please get informed before you vote.
James Aram
Chico
Daddy’s big bucks
Re “Vote or die!” (SN&R Editorial, October 27):
Yes on 54? Really? Note that California has a Democratic majority in the Legislature. Prop. 54 will make it really easy to stall legislation by successively amending it and delaying it 72 hours each time. All lobbyists need do is round up enough blue dog Dems to join Republicans and pass an amendment. Prop. 54 was put on the ballot by Charles Munger Jr. This Santa Clara Republican rich kid freely spends daddy’s bucks on GOP candidates and the GOP’s side on ballot measures. Most recent were his opposition in 2012 to Prop. 30, the sales tax increase which helped fix California’s budget, and his support of Prop. 32, which would have hamstrung union political action.
John Kwasnik
Sacramento
What’s that point?
Re “Folsom annexation blues” by Scott Thomas Anderson (SN&R News, October 20):
The fact is that so long as people are moving into this area, and they are, it is better to have their homes built on rocky Folsom hills rather than further out into cropland by North Natomas, Elk Grove or Southport.
The fact is also that these people are more often than not seeking family homes with yards, and are seeking homes they can afford. The Sacramento News & Review and its readers may pay lip service to “infill development” but heaven help any developer who actually tries to do any.
Finally, much of this population influx, or “sprawl,” is immigration driven. From 1990 to now, the proportion of native-born U.S. citizens in California has fallen. This even happened in absolute numbers in the 1990s as defense industries and military bases closed. Like it or not, Donald Trump may have a point here.
Bill Zaumen
Sacramento