State can’t change without two parties

Re: “No DOGE here, but there’s still lots of cutting” (Page A6, March 14).

Zac Townsend is correct that California should have its own DOGE department, but it would just become another dysfunctional department of the California government.

The problem isn’t that government leaders don’t know where the waste is but that they benefit from it. Nothing can or will change until we become a two-party state again.

— Ed Kahl, Woodside

DOGE works for oligarchs, not the taxpayers

Re: “No DOGE here, but there’s still lots of cutting” (Page A6, March 14).

While I agree with Zac Townsend’s assertion that there is a need for fiscal efficiency in California, his claim in his opinion piece that the aim of DOGE is to save taxpayers money is patently ridiculous. The administration and Elon Musk don’t care about taxpayers.

The real aim of DOGE is to decimate both our social safety nets and other vital federal departments in order to privatize them for the gain of the oligarchy currently holding sway over Washington, D.C.

— Laura Winter, San Jose

‘Mallard Fillmore’ bites the hand that feeds it

Re: “Mallard Fillmore” (Page B9, March 13).

The propaganda strip last week took on the free press, suggesting that it is good for government and society to restrict access to official briefings and press conferences, as the Trump administration has done with the Associated Press.

This is, in fact, the worst thing that could happen. If Congress is unwilling to check the power of the executive branch, our chief defense against an authoritarian government is independent news reporting. As Thomas Jefferson said, “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

It is neither wise nor legally required for a newspaper to give space to someone who would attack its primary function: reporting on what is said and done in the halls of power.

— Dan Toft, Santa Cruz

Loss of funding is Columbia’s own fault

Re: “Trump strips Columbia of $400M in grants, contracts” (Page A4, March 8).

Columbia has been known as one of the most hostile campuses for Jewish students, so it is only fitting that it will be the first university to lose federal funding for its refusal to make its campus safe for Jews.

Four hundred million dollars in grants have been withdrawn by the Trump administration. It was totally avoidable. All Columbia had to do was enforce its code of conduct and enforce the law when it came to anti-Israel demonstrations. Threats and intimidation against Jewish students should have been stopped and takeovers of campus buildings should never be tolerated.

Both the college administration and students are learning a simple lesson: actions have consequences. In the case of the university administration, its inaction also has consequences.

Other colleges should take note. Do your job because nothing would make Trump happier than to cut your funding.

— Gilbert Stein, Aptos

Has word ‘antisemitism’ outlived its usefulness?

Maybe we should stop using the word antisemitism. It can mean either anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli.

Anti-Jewish is what we usually mean by antisemitism. It’s a slur on everyone from a certain background. Anti-Israeli is criticism of Israel. That’s something all American citizens have a right to do, like criticizing our own government.

To label criticism of a nation (Israel) for its treatment of Semitic people (Palestinians) antisemitism blurs an important distinction and lets us interpret an event according to our preconceived ideas.

— Alex Havasy, Sunnyvale

Administration’s policies keep nation divided

I was born a White man, so in the minds of some people I should have the right of supremacy over people of color.

I was born a male, and in the view of these same people, my gender entitles me to dominate and control females.

Also, I was born heterosexual, which has sheltered me from the heinous assaults that plague those who do not conform to hetero-patriarchal expectations.

Beyond all facets of identity, we must embrace each other’s mutual humanity with care and respect.

Diversity, equity and inclusion offered a remedy for patent social injustice. But the current powers that be — among other fateful decisions — have opted to discard DEI, a mistake deeply injurious to our social fabric.

— Glauco Romeo, Fremont