Denham’s support for his own law is half-hearted
Last week, the House of Representatives voted against an amendment allowing young undocumented immigrants to enlist in the military. No, not the amendment you’re thinking of – Rep. Jeff Denham’s, R-Turlock, highly publicized ENLIST Act. Despite similar intent, the House never even voted on Denham’s legislation. Could be because Denham was a no-show at the House Rules Committee, which decides which amendments will be voted on?
This begs the question: Is Denham fighting for immigration reform or for show? Is he trying to win the votes of those praying for reform, whose families are being torn apart by flawed laws? Denham introduced his ENLIST Act multiple times without results. He vowed to pass immigration reform but wouldn’t help force a vote on it. Denham chalks it up to Republican leadership obstruction, but it looks like he isn’t committed to the cause if he didn’t bother to fight for his own bill.
I guess this isn’t all that surprising from the man who agreed that all illegal immigrants should be “arrested, detained and deported,” who opposed the federal DREAM Act and who supported Arizona’s radical anti-immigrant law in 2010. Keep that in mind next time Denham “fights for immigration reform.”
Joe A. Souza, Turlock
We need jobs in the USA
A May 18 Bee editorial supported the president’s push for his Pacific trade agreement. The same day another article covered the sad economics of a Maytag plant closure on a U.S. city, relocating the factory in Mexico. There are likely hundreds of stagnant communities where factory closures and trade deals like President Barack Obama’s kill jobs and communities. These aren’t good deals for the USA. Another recent article covered Obama speaking at a Nike rally for the trade agreement. Supposedly Nike will bring back a few thousand jobs if the agreement passes. Whoopee. And finally the April 26 story on Indonesian factory workers, stating that Nike and others employ at least 10,000 in “round the clock” factories in Jakarta. How about bringing all those jobs back, Nike? I’d cheer.
Together the articles paint a different picture. The Maytag story concurrent with your editorial shows the “eyes wide shut” of it all. We need factories and thousands of jobs, not the few Nike and Obama say they’ll toss back for show.
Christine Scheele, Modesto
Corporations must pay fair share
Re “Thanks to Chiesa, governor, end of ‘negative bailout’ near” (Opinions, May 17): I applaud Supervisor Vito Chiesa for working to fix the “negative bailout” in Stanislaus County resulting from Proposition 13. Chiesa points out that after Proposition 13, the state had to “bail out all counties in California for the property tax they would no longer receive.” We still face this problem today. Counties would not need this bailout if we could adequately generate revenue. The fairest way to do that is by closing the corporate tax loophole in Proposition 13 while keeping protections for homeowners and small businesses.
Although voters passed Proposition 13 to help homeowners, it has allowed corporations to shortchange counties out of $9 billion a year. Consequently, local governments have been forced to create new taxes and fees to make ends meet. We now pay the highest sales and income taxes in the nation to compensate for the billions we lose every year from this corporate tax giveaway. We don’t need a bailout; we need property tax reform.
In every other place in the country, commercial property is taxed at fair market value. Rather than continuing to increase the already high tax burden on working people, let’s finally have corporations pay their fair share of property taxes.
Ian Fregosi, Turlock