BY MOSHE HILL OPINION COLUMNS JANUARY 15 2025
There should be no confusion regarding the severity and cause of the California wildfires: It’s the fault of the California and Los Angeles governments. That is not to say that they can stop fires from occurring any more than that they can stop earthquakes, that Minnesota can stop snow, or that Florida can stop hurricanes. Natural disasters are the most predictable unpredictability of any geographic location. That is not an excuse, however, for not adequately preparing for a disaster that occurs every few years or so.
Democrats and the media are on a major gaslighting mission, trying to convince the public that California’s policies are not the cause of this massive failure, but rather it is climate change that is increasing the severity and frequency of these fires. For argument’s sake, let’s grant the premise that the increase in global carbon emissions have led to a change in the climate, which in turn causes California to be drier and windier than it would have normally been, had the carbon not been emitted in the first place. The obvious follow-up question to that supposition is: Now what?
Even by every available metric from the climate alarmist community (which is different from the scientific community, which includes, but is not limited to, climatologists), the goal in reduction of carbon emissions is to prevent future increases in global temperature. There is no one, anywhere, who claims that any effects can be reversed. So, if the effects are permanent, the question still remains: Now what?
That is a question that California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass have been avoiding. It would actually be understandable if they said that they were too busy at the moment to deal with the current crisis to meaningfully address the myriad of concerns in their leadership, and that would all be addressed once the fires were under control. That is not what they are saying, however. They are defending their records and attacking their accusers of “playing politics” when they (especially Newsom) play politics during disasters at every opportunity.
Newsom has been in statewide government since 2011, first as Lieutenant Governor and then as Governor in 2019. He has had a front-row seat to some of the most devastating wildfires California has ever seen, from the Bobcat Fire in 2020 to the Woolsey Fire in 2018, and including the Saddle Ridge, Getty, Thomas, and Creek Fires, Newsom’s tenure has been marked by his administration’s need to respond to these natural disasters. He seemingly has learned nothing during each of these disasters and has done nothing to prevent the next one.
The most galling part of this is that when he became Governor, Newsom promised a transformative approach to wildfire prevention, declaring it a year-round effort in response to the escalating threat that he claimed was posed by climate change. However, investigations by CapRadio and NPR’s California Newsroom revealed significant discrepancies between his claims and the reality on the ground. Newsom’s administration was accused of overstating the extent of preventive measures like fuel breaks and prescribed burns by 690%, with actual treated acres falling dramatically short of reported figures. Moreover, instead of increasing investment in wildfire prevention, Newsom’s policies led to a reduction in the Cal Fire budget by roughly $150 million, directly impacting the state’s capacity to manage and prevent wildfires.
Compounding these issues, local governance decisions have not helped. In Los Angeles, Mayor Bass recently cut the fire department budget by nearly $20 million, further hampering the city’s ability to respond effectively to fires. This budget cut reflects a broader mismanagement, where disaster preparedness, one of the few areas where government intervention can be notably beneficial, has been inadequately addressed.
The state’s focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in hiring for firefighting roles has also been criticized. While diversity in public services is important, critics argue that prioritizing intersectional characteristics over firefighting proficiency could potentially compromise the efficiency of wildfire response teams. A promotional video featuring LAFD Assistant Chief Kristine Larson, who makes a reported $399,000 per year, claims that people in need of emergency services want someone who “looks like you” to respond in a crisis, which is more important than the ability to deal with that crisis. When asked if women were able to pull men out of fires, Larson claimed that “He got himself in the wrong place if I have to carry him out of a fire.” This was not a hidden camera or hot mic incident. This was a recorded and edited promotional video put out by the Los Angeles Fire Department.
Focusing on the wrong issues is one thing, but failing to accomplish simple necessary actions to mitigate these disasters is even worse. Essential preventive measures such as clearing brush, creating fuel breaks, and conducting controlled burns have not been executed with the urgency or scale required. Infrastructure deficits further illustrate California’s unpreparedness. The failure to build new reservoirs or dams, like the one planned in the Sacramento Valley for decades, means the state lacks adequate water storage to manage during droughts or use for firefighting. Another reservoir was inexplicably emptied, draining it of 117 million gallons that could have been used to put out these fires.
All of this mismanagement and horrible decision making should be a wakeup call to Californians and the rest of the country, especially the blue states. Kathy Hochul in particular has prided herself on copying California policies in New York. In the realm of vehicle emissions, California’s stringent standards have been a model for what’s known as the “California Effect,” where states like New York adopt these regulations to ensure vehicles sold within their borders meet high environmental criteria. This includes the commitment to have all new passenger vehicles be zero-emission by 2035. Similarly, California’s aggressive climate policies, including cap-and-trade and greenhouse gas reduction targets, have guided New York’s own climate action plans. These plans may seem lovely on paper (for some), but they are part of a broader pattern of ignoring the actual role of government in favor of restructuring society in the image of the Left.
New York is clearly opting for the California path instead of the Florida one, where Governor Ron DeSantis turned hurricane season from a devastating multi-month rescue and recovery effort into a mild inconvenience. New York is not a stranger to natural disasters; and after seeing how the government of California has failed their citizenry, New Yorkers need to wonder if the next natural disaster will be their last.