A Selection of editorials from
California newspapers
Jan.
9
Los Angeles Times:
“Writers strike is war”
We
get the impression, in this third month of the Hollywood writers strike, that
morale on the picket lines and in the coffee shops isn’t so hot. That’s odd,
given how strong the writers are looking right now.
With
the downfall of the Golden Globe Awards, the Writers Guild of America has drawn
blood. Now is not the time to go wobbly. If the writers want to win, they need
to understand the grim logic of their situation. Good public relations are
fine, as are pious press releases, shows of support from the Screen Actors
Guild and crocodile tears for lost awards shows. But to win, the writers need
to get serious about demolishing fall schedules and annihilating Christmas
release dates. Yes, the guild’s leadership is full of high sentence about
getting everybody back to work and doing what’s best for all the peoples of
planet Earth, but let’s be honest: Strike is war.
And
frankly, we’re having a hard time understanding how it helps the guild’s
position to have the troops making separate peace agreements. After deals were
cut allowing writers to go back to work for David Letterman and for Tom Cruise
and Paula Wagner, guild leaders Patric M. Verrone and Michael Winship sent
out a memo bragging that these agreements feature “all the proposals we were
preparing to make when the conglomerates left the bargaining table.” That’s
nice, but both deals will be superseded by whatever terms the guild and the
Association of Motion Picture and Television Producers ultimately agree to. ...
The
guild’s argument seems to be that the independent deals will be a Trojan horse
to get the writers’ demands inside the producers’ camp. But the Trojan horse is
a made-up story. It doesn’t work in an actual fight. The math of a strike is so
simple even English majors can grasp it: If money is changing
hands, that’s bad for the strikers. ...
The
writers strike has had a real, and lamentable, effect
on the industry and on the Los Angeles economy. It is for this reason that
we’ve repeatedly urged both sides to return to the table. But an essential
truth seems to be getting lost here. Pain isn’t a byproduct of the walkout;
it’s the whole point of it, and it should be what compels the negotiations to
resume.
Jan. 7
(Los Angeles) Daily
News: “Britney needs help”
“Leave Britney alone!”
That
was the YouTube advice of “Britney Guy,” aka Chris Crocker, the Internet
sensation who back in September tearfully suggested that America take a break
from its obsession with its No.1 celebrity train wreck.
He
may be right.
While
the Britney Spears drama has long been sordid, and, more recently, pathetic,
its latest chapter brings it clear into the realm of the downright sad. When the pop star was merely getting photographed sans panties or
shaving her head, her behavior was bizarre, but at least it was (mostly)
harmless. Not any more.
Last
weekend’s circus, during which police, firefighters and legions of
photographers descended on her home, had to have been utterly traumatizing. Not
so much for Britney — who left in an ambulance for mental evaluation — but for
her two sons, Sean Preston and Jayden, ages 2 and 1, respectively.
It’s
hard enough for any child to be caught in a custody fight. But for Sean Preston
and Jayden, it’s even worse, shuttled from home to home by bodyguards, with one
parent headed for the mental ward, and the entire world watching.
So
perhaps it really is time to “leave Britney alone” — if not for her sake, then
at least for that of two small children who bear the consequences of her bad
judgment.
Jan. 9
San Francisco
Chronicle: “State of the (troubled) state”
You
have to hand it to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for trying — again and again.
Schwarzenegger
marched into Sacramento promising to change California’s dysfunctional spending
process for good. He’s suffered two wounding failures (he tried to get the
Legislature to adopt a spending cap during his first year; then watched his
2005 ballot measure for a spending cap and midyear budget-slashing authority
get trounced by the voters).
If
he didn’t want to go down this road again, who could blame him?
But
Schwarzenegger’s not giving up at all. “I am again proposing a constitutional
amendment so that our spending has some relationship with our revenues,” he
said in his annual State of the State address Tuesday. His vision includes
giving the governor the ability to cut the budget in middle of the fiscal year
and the power to bank surplus revenue in good times.
In
light of a budget deficit that’s scheduled to hit $14 billion next year,
Schwarzenegger’s determination is starting to look pretty savvy. Will he get
his constitutional amendment? Judging on past results, we’d say probably not —
and there are plenty of reasons to be wary of any attempt to authorize or
constrain spending by automation. But the threat of one might be enough to get
the Legislature hustling toward a workable solution for our state’s fiscal
crisis. ...
To
get a responsible solution, both sides are going to have to compromise.
Democratic legislators are right when they say that California can’t cut its
way out of a $14 billion budget deficit — but Republican legislators are right
when they argue that large annual increases in spending are unsustainable.
Legislators
and the governor must come up with a better spending formula now, because the
state’s budgetary problems are only going to get worse. This week, the Public
Employee Post-Employment Benefits Commission released the first-ever report on
California’s unfunded retiree health benefits: the total is a whopping $118
billion. The commission also noted that the state has $63.5 billion worth of
unfunded public system pension benefits. In a few years, the
budget bickering that’s soon to fire up for 2008 is going to like the good old
days.
Jan. 8
San Jose Mercury
News: “California’s kids deserve better”
California
has 9.5 million children, and one out of every eight
children in the United States lives in the Golden State. So, how well
California educates and takes care of its children plays an important role in
the state — and nation’s — future.
Yet
California is failing its children to a frightening degree in almost every
important area of their development. The state must find ways to send more kids
to preschool, help them become more physically fit and graduate at a
substantially higher rate from high school.
The
latest report card on how the state’s children are doing was issued last week
by Children Now, the respected nonprofit and nonpartisan kids’ advocacy
organization. It documented that fewer than half (47 percent) of California’s
three- and four-year-olds are in preschool.
A
third of the state’s children are obese. And more than a third fail to graduate
from high school. These are the kind of numbers one would expect from a poor,
disadvantaged state with a non-caring populace. California has the resources,
heart and expertise to do far better by its children. ...
Some
will be quick to blame the state’s low grades on the high number of illegal
immigrants in the state. But the Children Now study points out that 94 percent
of California’s children are U.S. citizens. The state’s low rankings are more
pronounced among low income and minority families, but the problem exists in
every county in the state, regardless of income and ethnicity.
The
issues cited by Children Now aren’t new. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger made
comprehensive health care reform the top public policy priority of 2007 and
wants to make education reform the No. 1 issue of 2008. But he will face a
massive challenge in completing health care and education reform because the
state is confronting a $14 billion budget deficit this year.
It’s
no secret that children who have health insurance, are physically fit and
receive a quality education are more likely to become productive, less
burdensome members of society.
Putting
children first must be California’s top priority.
Jan. 9
The Sacramento Bee:
“Up for grabs”
In
a year of high interest in the race for president, the field remains wide open.
The earliest small states have taken their measure of the candidates and now
Californians will have their say on Feb. 5.
In
Iowa four days ago, voters in both party caucuses went overwhelmingly for the
youngest candidates, those least tied to the Bush era — Barack
Obama for the Democrats and Mike Huckabee
for the Republicans. This generational shift was led by younger voters who
turned out in numbers equal to older voters.
In
New Hampshire, as in Iowa, more voters turned out for the Democratic primary
than the Republican primary — a strong hint that Democrats are highly motivated
in 2008. But in New Hampshire yesterday, the voting electorate was older.
In
the Republican primary, these voters went for John McCain, at 71 the oldest
candidate in the field and the one with the most experience. McCain — a former
Navy fighter pilot, Vietnam prisoner of war and U.S. senator since 1986 —
represents enduring American values of courage and steadfastness.
On
any number of issues he is unwavering in offering unpopular stances because
they’re “what my experience and knowledge and background tells me is the right
thing to do.” Refreshingly, he doesn’t pander to polls or slam opponents. He’s
of the old school that believes his role is “not to play it safe” but to “serve
my country.” That’s not a generational change, but a generational restoration.
In
the Democratic primary, voters resurrected the candidacy of Hillary Clinton,
while also showing strong support for Obama. It’s
clear that Democratic voters are still mulling over a choice between Clinton
and Obama — and enjoying the competition.
This
should make the candidates better as they move into the next set of caucuses
and primaries that will seal the race: Michigan (Jan. 15), Nevada and South
Carolina (Jan. 19), Florida (Jan. 29) and then the 22 Tsunami Tuesday states on
Feb 5.
Nothing
is foreordained in this election for either party. That’s an exhilarating
thought as Californians prepare to weigh in Feb. 5.