Back door for ‘Speaker Trump’
Re “House Speaker Donald Trump? Please, no,” Opinion, Dec. 20
Nicholas Goldberg’s column was informative and well-written, but it did not touch on why Republicans are pushing for former President Trump to be elected speaker of the House if the GOP wins control in 2022. If there is a dispute about the counting of electoral votes, and neither Congress nor the courts declare a winner by Jan. 20, 2025, Trump would be installed as president, per the Constitution and the 1947 President Succession Act. That would occur even if Trump did not run for president in 2024, or if he ran and lost in a landslide. Once installed in this backdoor fashion, there will be little chance of getting him out peacefully.
The absurdity of making Trump speaker is giving cover to the real reason behind this GOP trial balloon. It is up to Goldberg and other members of the media to make this more clear before it actually happens.
Ron Shinkman, Northridge
Most Americans are concerned with COVID-19 and the new Omicron variant affecting a return to normality. They are worried about inflation, meaning higher prices for food and gasoline, and fearful of crime.
Does anyone believe that many Americans have given any real thought to the possibility that Trump could become House speaker?
It seems Goldberg and others in the media can’t write anything positive about the disastrous first year of the Biden administration, so their focus will continue to be on Trump. Janet Polak
Beverly Hills
Trump will never be the speaker of the House.
For one thing, he would have to do actual work, which is something he has eschewed his entire life.
For another, he would actually have to understand the Constitution and how Congress functions, something he has never bothered to learn.
He would not be a king; he would merely be the speaker, but this is a role he will never comprehend.
I daresay he could be disqualified before that issue ever comes up. He is facing multiple lawsuits and possibly criminal charges, which he seems to be able to wiggle his way out of most of the time.
However, I am hoping that this time could be different.
How Trump still has supporters is completely beyond me. Just the thought that he could actually be speaker is absolutely terrifying. How low have we sunk to even contemplate such a thing?
Rebecca S. Hertsgaard Palm Desert
Our Congress is pretty aptly described as a gang of 535 self-aggrandizers. Thus, moving the clown show from Mar-a-Lago in Florida to the House rotunda would be a piece of cake for the ringmaster of the Trump circus.
It would also be a more accurate representation of Capitol Hill chaos than we have today.
Yes, Speaker Trump is a terrible idea, but is Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) much better? Paul Bloustein
Cincinnati
Don’t forget the 50 GOP senators
Re “Democrats vow to tackle climate,” Dec. 21
Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) is but one among many dissembling, selfserving politicians.
I am not saying cut him some slack for declaring his opposition to President Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda. I just don’t understand why all the burden must be on Democrats to pass legislation to solve the problems faced by people in this country.
How did it come to pass that all the “me-firsters” in the Republican Party got an exemption from watching out for their constituents? Some of the ink and airtime devoted to the recalcitrant Manchin should be turned to answering how the Republican Party escapes accountability. Marcia Goldstein
Laguna Woods
Manchin’s “no” vote is not the sounding of the death knell for the effort to tackle climate change, nor is it a threat to climate policy.
It does, however, send a message that he will not continue to approve programs that Congress refuses to fully fund. This is a refreshing new approach. It also sends the message that Biden does not have an FDR-sized mandate to tackle all of our problems at once. Where, then, do we start?
We could be honest about the long-term effect of currently existing programs such as Medicare and Social Security. How will we fund these and other programs going forward? Kevin Minihan
Los Angeles
As the domestic and global wreckage from Manchin’s opposition to Biden’s spending agenda metastasizes, so does the senator’s horrifying legacy. In his stubborn resistance to funding meaningful action on the climate crisis, Manchin seems to believe that he can defy the laws of nature.
The majority of Americans wants our country to lead the world on climate action. The senator works for us, not his handlers or his voracious ego.
Memo to Manchin: Even as you help hurl us toward a sixth global mass extinction while damaging our credibility abroad, there is hope. Should you ever see the light, I would be glad to provide a reading list to help inspire in you some moral and courageous leadership. Ellen Chavez Kelley
Santa Barbara
When it comes to finally doing something, anything, about issues critical to the well-being of ordinary Americans, the Senate has failed.
The failure is not solely because of Manchin. It is because of the Republican Party.
There is not one voice among the party’s 50 senators for children or seniors. All reject both taking an international leadership role to address climate change and restoring a modicum of fairness to the federal corporate tax structure.
Not having one Republican out of 50 willing to put the protection of Americans ahead of their political obsessions and fears is the reason the government cannot act, not the lack of integrity of a self-possessed senator representing the state with arguably the lowest quality of life in this country.
Given the needs, none of us should even know Manchin’s name. Michael McGuire
Palm Desert
With Manchin abruptly turning down “Build Back Better” — which was designed to address the needs of Manchin’s fellow West Virginians, who live in one of the country’s poorest states — Biden and the Democratic leadership should prioritize and salvage individual provisions of the package.
Focus on the features with the broadest appeal: free preschool, subsidized child care, an expanded child tax credit, Medicaid expansion, a cap on out-ofpocket insulin costs and hearing aid coverage under Medicare.
Concentrating on these unmet needs — along with women’s reproductive rights and raising taxes on the wealthiest individuals — will enhance the Democrats’ chances in next year’s midterm election. Harold N. Bass
Porter Ranch
Rooftop solar model for water
Re “What to do with all that rain,” editorial, Dec. 19
We live in a semi-arid environment. Unless we want to dry up and blow away, we definitely need to capture and use the precious rain we get here, as your editorial noted.
But we also need to prioritize and encourage the use of residential gray water. Water usage in the Southland is based on a wasteful model. Bath, shower and laundry water is used only once and then sent into the sewage system.
This water could be safely diverted for use on outdoor landscaping with an in-home gray water system. Using gray water has numerous benefits, including saving water, lowering bills, diverting water into aquifers and creating cooler microclimates.
Legislation should be enacted that requires all new construction to be fitted with gray water systems. There should also be government incentives provided for installation in existing residences.
Gray water use is a key component in mitigating drought conditions in California.
Julie Starrett Claremont
Your editorial about the relationship between regional geography and water use made many good points. California’s water system was designed for old climate patterns, and we must adjust, including by capturing more rain.
Orange County is a leader in groundwater management. Flood flows create an opportunity to recharge groundwater aquifers, providing more water supply reliability to grow the food we all want. Farmers in Orange County and elsewhere are all a part of that.
Unreliable farm water supplies are not good for Californians. Less California-grown food means fewer food choices, higher prices and more imports, often from places with less stringent safety standards.
Providing the water needed for farms, people and the environment to thrive throughout California can happen if we work together.
Mark Lopez Irvine The writer is president of the Orange County Farm Bureau.
One concern not mentioned in the editorial is the depletion of the aquifer under the Central Valley, causing the ground there to sink.
In years of heavy snow in the Sierra Nevada, we need creative minds to figure out how to get some of that water back into the aquifer while still having adequate flow to keep our rivers healthy.
Linda Roselund Rosemead
William Mulholland, the engineer who built the first Los Angeles Aqueduct, famously said, “There it is — take it.”
Today, it’s more like, “There it isn’t — now what?”
Agencies’ attention is almost exclusively on massive, expensive water projects. That won’t work when water is oversubscribed and there’s less of it.
Rooftop solar panels have eliminated the need to build more fossil-fuel power plants. They involve public participation, one small rooftop at a time. The region would be similarly well served by “distributed recharge” of rain water.
We need to incentivize rain water capture and recharge, one property at a time. Eliminate any rebates for installing impervious plastic lawns. Empower neighborhood councils (they get public funding) to implement programs locally.
Douglas Hileman Valley Glen
HOW TO WRITE TO US
Please send letters to letters@latimes.com. For submission guidelines, see latimes.com/letters or call 1-800-LA TIMES, ext. 74511.