Page 4 - Dinuba Sentinel 6-14-18 E-edition

Opinion
A4 | Thursday, June 14, 2018
In My Opinion
Common sense is a singular guiding force
Democrats who could be considered moderate. Sadly, those big cities, of which I speak, tend to give us a litany of lunacy.
Considering the tremendous edge
of registered Democrats over their Republican counterparts statewide, there appears to be little hope in
the near future of a conservative restructuring of the political scene as is being witnessed in other states. We do, however, take solace in the fact that there is an ever-growing number of California cities who are joining
the United States government in its lawsuit to rid this state of its ridiculous notion of being a “Sanctuary State.” How like the old west we have become when there are entire areas which
are to be considered safe zones for outlaws.
What kind of message do you suppose that sends to the worst among us?
Guest Column
Back when college was
debt-free
s May gives way to June, the last college grad “I watched students struggle with
Fred Hall - Publisher
Although last Tuesday's “jungle” primary election did produce some surprises, it
primarily, no pun intended, held up
for public display just how chaotic and dysfunctional politics in California has become which was graphically detailed by the length of the ballot. I'm sure every candidate who ran for public office is a wonderful person but it's difficult to vote for them when one knows little or nothing about who they really are or what they stand for! In California it's often difficult to figure out what the real agenda of incumbents might be because they say one thing and do another when elected.
We were told—repeatedly and often— by a local newspaper just how awful and evil Devin Nunes is and that the race between himself and Janz was a referendum on Donald Trump and had nothing, basically, to do with either of them. Detractors loudly proclaimed it was about Trump and Nunes' defense of our President. To us, it appeared Nunes was only pursuing the truth and defending the rule of law.
That bit of wisdom of the election really being about Trump, mentioned above, was penned by a sportswriter with a subsequent attempt by his organization to walk it back a bit. They appear to claim they were talking about the General election while explicitly stating otherwise in the headline for their piece.
Jim Costa, long time Democrat and left-leaning sycophant of the party apparatchik as well as do-nothing Central Valley Congressman from
the 16th Congressional District had
the fight of his life against a virtual unknown in the political world, Elizabeth Heng. When one considers the extremely thin margin separating these two candidates, one should also realize that this District leans Democrat by more than nine percentage points, making it the 125th most Democratic District in the entire nation.
Since about 1960 the voter registration in California has become so left-leaning and liberal that it's sometimes difficult to imagine any
Guest Column
Fred Hall
scenario under which Republicans might win an election. The “blue wave” seems non-existent and hope does remain in several races. Once one gets outside the huge metropolitan area of this state, there even seems to be a few
Even prior to statehood, this was
an extraordinary area, beautiful,
expansive, rich in minerals, pastureland A and rich soil for farming.
Why should the strong people who built this great state stand by and watch as politicians destroy and denigrate everything we've worked for so they can build their personal coffers and bankrupt the rest of us?
We believe, while it is indeed in short supply today, that common sense is a singular guiding force for millions of Californians. Perhaps it is time to rise up and declare, “I'm mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.”
But, as always, that's only one man's opinion.
Fred Hall is publisher of The Sentinel.
ceremonies are wrapping up and the last
financial aid the whole time I was in school and after,” Erika said. “Students are thinking about food, rent, books, and tuition while they should be thinking about class and homework and education.”
Erika and Gail’s stories are two striking examples of the disparity between baby boomers and today’s
parties are coming to a close. Now the job hunt for recent grads begins in earnest — with the looming specter of student loan payments drawing ever closer.
Today’s average student debt is around $37,000. But in America’s largest state, it wasn’t that long ago that any student could get a world-class, debt-free education — regardless of their economic background.
That state was California, and Gail Leondar-Wright was one of those students.
Gail came from a middle-class family — her dad was an engineer and her mom a stay-at-home parent. She attended UC Berkeley from 1976 to 1980, graduating with a bachelor’s degree in theater. At the time, the elite public school was tuition-free and required a mere $600 per year in fees, or just under $1,400 in today’s dollars.
After graduating, she got her master’s, spent 10 years working in theater, and then launched a successful public relations firm still in operation today.
“I had one job — just go to school and get good grades,” she recalls. “If I’d had to work throughout school or graduated with a ton of debt, I’d never have been able to start a business or take a risk working in a low-wage field like theater.”
“There’s no reason today’s generation shouldn’t have the same opportunities my generation had, Gail says.” But they don’t.
Just ask Erika Jimenez. She studied political science at California State University, East Bay and graduated last year. Tuition and fees were $6,840 per year by the time she graduated — not including room, board, books, and many incidentals.
Unlike Gail, Erika worked through school, first in retail and then for the school’s teachers’ union. Still, Erika graduated with $27,000 in student debt. A bill now shows up every month in her inbox for $283.95.
She moved back in with her folks after graduating and picked up a job as a mini bar attendant at a local hotel — a far cry from her dream of working for a nonprofit.
Josh Hoxie
e truth about "sanctuary cities"
generation. A new report I co-authored for the Institute for Policy Studies, called Restoring Opportunity: Taxing Wealth to Fund Higher Education in California, highlights these stories.
The report points out that the skyrocketing cost of attending public colleges in California, up 70 percent after inflation from 2003 to 2016, tracks neatly with the elimination of the state estate tax in California, which resulted in $18 billion in lost revenue. The result has been a big increase in the burden faced by California families.
Inspired by Bernie Sanders, the California College
for All Coalition proposes restoring debt-free higher education in California by restoring the state estate
tax. By taxing the estates of the few thousand multi- millionaires and billionaires in California, they estimate they could raise $4 billion a year to expand college access.
Their plan could pass through the state legislature or on the 2020 ballot, they hope.
College for All would recycle opportunity for the rising generation by asking the heirs of massive fortunes to chip in. It’s a model that could also help millions of students in other states like Michigan, Ohio, and Florida.
Josh Hoxie directs the Taxation and Opportunity Project at the Institute for Policy Studies. He’s the coauthor of the new IPS report Restoring Opportunity: Taxing Wealth to Fund Higher Education in California. Distributed by OtherWords.org.
In a recent White House meeting on “sanctuary cities,” President Trump called some undocumented
immigrants “animals” — a disturbing new low even for someone who’s demonized immigrant communities from the beginning. The president painted
a picture of “sadistic criminals” who are being given “safe harbor” through so-called sanctuary policies.
While Trump and his right-wing supporters would have people believe that “sanctuary cities” are places that allow lawlessness and where immigrants aren’t prosecuted for crimes, the reality is far different.
Here are the facts: the federal government can enforce immigration law anywhere. The term “sanctuary city” typically refers to a jurisdiction that wants to limit the use of local
law enforcement resources to carry
out federal law enforcement work, especially when they’re asked to violate constitutional protections.
While these cities focus their resources on fighting local crime, they can still work with the federal government on immigration enforcement, since federal agents can issue a warrant. This is especially the case in situations where an undocumented person has carried out a serious crime — as opposed to someone who, for example, happens to have a broken taillight.
Experts note that undermining “sanctuary cities,” which are more accurately called “safe cities,” often isn’t good for anyone.
As two police chiefs from Storm
Lake and Marshalltown, Iowa recently explained: “We depend on residents, including immigrants, to come to us when they see something suspicious or potentially criminal. If they hear of a looming ‘crackdown’ that could affect their families and friends, they are less likely to come to us to report and prevent actual crimes.”
A law enforcement association representing some of the largest cities
in the country has similarly argued that asking local police to do the work of federal immigration officers would likely lead not only to more crime against immigrants, but also to more crime overall.
And a 2017 analysis from the
University of California at San Diego found that “counties designated as ‘sanctuary’
areas by ICE typically experience significantly lower rates of all types
of crime“ than comparable counties
without such policies in place.
While ongoing police abuse against
communities of color has underscored the urgent need for police reform and the rebuilding of deeply damaged community-police trust, further eroding trust by attempting to dismantle “safe cities” policies would be a significant step in the wrong direction.
Despite the facts, Trump and his administration want to scapegoat immigrants, appealing to fear and racism rather than actually looking at which policies are most effective.
Time and again, Trump entangles two separate issues — immigration and crime — by telling gruesome stories about crimes committed by immigrants that exploit the pain of victims’ families and aim to demonize entire communities. (When it comes to crime against immigrants however, the administration is mysteriously silent.)
The reality is that immigrants are actually less likely to commit crimes than people who were born here — and that immigrants who do commit crimes go through our criminal justice system, just like everyone else.
Especially as Trump’s administration is reaching new levels of cruelty by separating children and parents at
our borders, we have to be vigilant in countering the use of any dehumanizing lies for political gain. We have to push our elected officials to stand up to Trump’s dangerous anti-immigrant agenda.
Our public policies should be grounded in our shared values and in sound data about what works and what doesn’t work in our communities — never in fear-mongering.
Lizet Ocampo is the political director of People For the American Way. Distributed by OtherWords.org.
Lizet Ocampo
The Dinuba Sentinel welcomes submissions of letters to the editor on topics of local relevance. Word limit is 350. Letters are considered once per month for each submitter.
Letters must include the author’s name, phone number and address for verification. Mail to 145 South L Street, Dinuba,
CA, 93618, or e-mail to editor@thedinubasentinel.com. Letters will be edited for length, grammar and clarity. Libelous letters will not be printed.
Guest columns will be considered for publication -
E-mail editor@thedinubasentinel.com. Word limit is 650.
Join the discussion