View this email in your browser ([link removed])


** Edward Ring Testifies Before Congress: Overregulation Fuels California Wildfires
------------------------------------------------------------

Dear John,

Three weeks into the second Trump administration, it’s clear that the federal government is doing for Californians what we couldn’t do for ourselves. On education, immigration, water, the High-Speed Rail project and more, federal officials are driving policy change in California. That leaves the state’s political leadership screaming from the backseat.

The highpoint came Thursday, February 6, in congressional testimony ([link removed]) by three Californians, including CPC’s own Edward Ring.

Speaking before the House Judiciary Committee’s Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust Subcommittee, Ring declared that California wildfires — including the recent wildfires in Los Angeles – are, in fact, a result of terrible state regulations. These catastrophes are inflicted on us, not by changes in the global climate, but by stupid politicians and the voters who elect them.

“While no amount of preventive measures or properly applied firefighting resources can stop all of the wildfires in our state, their frequency and severity is a consequence of overregulation,” Ring told the committee. “The regulations most damaging to our forests are, ironically, justified by misguided environmentalist values.”

In his testimony and answers to follow-up questions, Ring hammered California lawmakers for making their state more flammable. His comparatively short list of recommendations — he submitted 38 to the House of Representatives — begins with this declaration:

“Repeal the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, 1970), or limit standing for lawsuits to elected law enforcement officials, and waive CEQA for housing, manufacturing and other employment projects, forest management, and infrastructure/utility and public service projects.”

Ring said that implementing a "loser pays" model would significantly reduce the number of unjustified lawsuits.

In case his point was lost on members of Congress, Ring offered them this brief history of CEQA’s role in wildfire catastrophes.

“Because of environmentalist regulations and litigation pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the California Endangered Species Act, and their federal equivalents, California’s annual timber harvest is down to 1.5 billion board feet per year — about 25 percent of what it was as recently as the 1980s,” he testified. “These and other environmental laws have nearly killed our logging industry while also making it much harder to do prescribed burns or graze.”

The result? California forests, including those managed by the federal government, “are dried out and unhealthy because there are now at least three times as many trees per acre than the natural density, each tree competing with its neighbor for limited light, water, and soil nutrients,” Ring said. Thus weakened, the trees become kindling — vulnerable to lightning strikes, high wind, fireworks, cigarette smokers, campfires, arsonists and downed power lines.

“There is an alternative,” he continued hopefully:

In 2020 the Creek Fire burned 380,000 acres in the Central Sierra Mountains. But 20,000 acres in the middle of that fire, the watershed around Shaver Lake, didn't burn at all. That's because for several decades the owners practiced what they call total ecosystem management. They used prescribed burns, mechanical thinning, grazing, and selective logging to manage their forest. Wildlife biologists who were on site claim that species counts in the area actually exceed levels found in forests where state regulations have banned logging.

“These practices need to be extended to all wildland in California,” Ring said.

Ring was invited to Capitol Hill (along with his counterparts, Steve Greenhut of the R Street Institute and Steve Hilton, founder of Golden Together) because American taxpayers deserve to know why federal relief ought to go to California, where voters seem determined to commit the equivalent of suicide. Following every “natural disaster” (especially those exacerbated by bad policies), California’s political establishment doubles down on the claim that the cause of our misfortune is climate change — that and dastardly oil companies.

Just last week, while Ring was fine-tuning his congressional remarks and flexing his vocal cords, state Sen. Scott Wiener introduced legislation that will make California worse ([link removed]) . His Senate Bill 222 incentivizes insurance companies to sue oil companies. He proposes to aid them in their legal piracy by simply declaring unprovable facts to be true — by establishing as a matter of law the environmentalists’ claim that oil and gas companies contributed materially to the wildfires that cause so much damage in California.

There are massive logical gaps in the senator’s bill. First, multiple lawsuits now say the Eaton fire was sparked by a transmission line owned by SoCal Edison (SCE denies the claims). The Palisades fire appears to have been started by fireworks; it’s now likely that Los Angeles Fire Chief Kristine Crowley prematurely pulled firefighters off that brush fire, allowing it to smolder until Santa Ana Winds whipped the embers into a catastrophe a week later.

But don’t bother Wiener with such facts. He has his own. In his press release announcing SB 222, Wiener claims that, thanks to oil producers, “from 2018–2022, California had the largest number of average acres burned annually and the most residences destroyed due to wildfires of any state within the United States.”

That doesn’t mean what Wiener thinks it means — which is that 49 other states have somehow inexplicably escaped the worst effects of changes in the earth’s climate.

Wiener’s claim actually proves there’s something unique about California.

But just try getting congressional Democrats, including those from California, to acknowledge that regulation might have something to do with California’s pyromaniacal politics. Confronted with Ring’s testimony, committee member Ted Lieu (D-Torrance) fought back with the closest blunt weapon at hand: It was California Governor Ronald Reagan — “a Republican!” — who signed the California Environmental Quality Act into law.

That’s true, Ring admitted. But Reagan was a man, and men make mistakes. Further, Ring noted, in 1970, the CEQA bill that Reagan signed was just two pages. In the 55 years since, it has metastasized — and become the animating impulse in many of the state’s more than 220 state agencies, regulating everything from the construction of a new home to the clearing of brush on a dry hillside. It is behind the state’s drive for “clean energy,” EVs, and the end of forest management.

It’s why, surrounded by oil and natural gas deposits that would be the envy of most nations, Californians — including Lieu’s constituents — pay the highest gasoline and electricity prices in the nation. It’s why our forests burn with nearly unquenchable hunger for nature, homes and people.

Citing the moral hazard of a federal bailout, the Trump transition team and congressional Republicans said aid should be linked to changes in state policies — maybe Ring-like reforms to state laws that make wildfires more common and deadly. Newsom and his allies immediately denounced this “politicization” of the fires. And then Newsom (what’s the word?) politicized the fires.

Weeks before the disaster, Newsom called state lawmakers into a special session to approve an emergency $50 million campaign to “Trump-proof” California; that money would go to Attorney General Bonta and to leftist nonprofits. When Republican lawmakers rebelled, L.A.’s fires presented Newsom with an opportunity. Tying the anti-Trump package to $2.5 billion in wildfire relief forced Republicans into a dilemma: spend millions funding leftist organizations that will haunt California for decades or appear to coldheartedly oppose aid to fire victims.

Now Newsom’s game may be over. While Ring was testifying before Congress, Newsom was in the White House begging Trump for money; Politico ([link removed]) characterized their “more than 90-minute meeting” as “once again displaying the governor’s willingness to cede his leadership of the resistance — at least for now.”

Trump, meanwhile, has been like some exotic six-armed god, changing California policy in ways that seemed unlikely a year ago. In a largely theatrical move, Trump ordered the release of water in federal reservoirs to California farmers. Critics say the water will do nothing to make Los Angeles safer, but Gavin Newsom understood the president’s point: he immediately called for water-storage practices recommended for years by CPC’s own Edward Ring. The Los Angeles Times’ headline ([link removed]) tells the story of what happened next: “Newsom issues order to ‘maximize’ water capture during storms. Critics say it sounds just like Trump.”

Speaking from the Oval Office, the president said he would launch a federal investigation into Gavin Newsom’s high-speed rail ([link removed]) , calling it “the worst managed project I think I've ever seen, and I've seen some of the worst.” California Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Roseville) ([link removed]) reached into his coat pocket to find – how’d that get there!? – a bill that would end federal funding for the project.

Trump’s determination to deport illegal immigrants convicted of committing other crimes has sparked a new round of chest-thumping by California officials. But Trump’s threat to prosecute those who violate federal immigration law has muted some of the official enthusiasm for protecting criminals.

The list goes on.

Ring said the committee’s Democrats may have been surprised by the performance of their own expert witness, Frank Frievalt.

Frievalt is an actual firefighter. Beginning in 1979, he rose through the ranks in federal, state, city, and special district agencies before retiring from the Mammoth Lakes Fire Protection District in the fall of 2022.

Ring called Frievalt’s comments “helpful and accurate," but he says the panel's Democrats didn’t seem to know how to handle the fact that their witness “essentially confirmed every recommendation” proposed by the majority’s witnesses.

“Given the Republican majorities in Congress, it feels like necessary changes to California policies could become a reality,” Ring said.

It’s worth your time to watch the full hearing ([link removed]) , if only to compare the remarks of the many California representatives on the dais.

But if you’re short on time, there are two moments in the hearing where Ring gets to the bottom of the problems that state and federal leaders must address if California is going to make any real progress in preventing future wildfires. Be sure to read the excerpts and watch the videos below.

— By CPC President Will Swaim

You can read Edward Ring's written testimony here. ([link removed])

Excerpts from Edward Ring Exchange with Subcommittee Chair Scott Fitzgerald
[link removed]
Subcommittee Chair Scott Fitzgerald: Mr. Ring, let me start with you. Why do you think there is such a resistance to these common sense approaches that many have just heard about this morning and certainly ... since the fires happened in LA?
Edward Ring: I can't think of a harder question to answer: I find it inexplicable. I do think that some of the motivation for the litigation, for example, that we see against sensible wildland management is an economic motive. Again, the regulatory and legal environment, because of these laws, are such that it’s very easy to file a lawsuit to try to break any project that’s going to develop land or manage wildland. So I think a lot of it would have to do with that.

I also think that there is a preoccupation with climate change that sort of diverts people from looking at, I think what Steve [Hilton] referred to as “the nuts and bolts.” If you're concerned, truly concerned, about climate change, you would be wanting to pursue sensible policies with more urgency, not less. So I think it’s partly ideology and I think it’s partly some perverse incentives caused by the legal environment that we’ve created.

Fitzgerald: So what could the federal government do, what kind of steps could we take, to ensure that all states, including California, have less roadblocks to mitigate?

Ring: An act of Congress could, for example, make losers pay in frivolous lawsuits that have to do with environmental issues. I think that would be a reform that would cut across every law or regulation that’s being exploited currently...
[link removed]
Excerpts from Edward Ring Exchange with Rep. Kevin Kiley

Rep. Kevin Kiley (CA-Roseville): Mr. Ring, in your opinion what is the more effective strategy when it comes to fire prevention? Is it banning cars and leaf blowers or is it reducing fuel through things like prescribed burns and strategic tree removal?

Edward Ring: Well, the answer to me is obvious. You're not going to have any sort of short-term impact certainly, or even long-term impact, if the rest of the world doesn't do the same thing with respect to whatever the theories may hold with respect to greenhouse gas and climate change.

But what you can do is bring back logging, bring back grazing and also mechanical thinning, which would be effective in the chaparral and on the steep hillsides. You can do mechanical thinning and you can do grazing. There's equipment that can do that nowadays and, of course, grazing — they've been able to do that for millennia. So, bringing back logging, thinning, grazing and prescribed burns is the solution and a lot of that can be done commercially, which would actually generate tax revenue and good jobs instead of costing hundreds of billions of dollars.

Rep. Kiley: And, by the way, which is more effective at reducing or limiting emissions, those sort of fire prevention measures or banning certain consumer goods?

Ring: Well, I think banning consumer goods has almost no impact on emissions compared to being able to properly manage our forests and wildlands.
CPC Events ()
[link removed]
How do you hit the ground running in 2025 and make the most of your new term in office? Knowing the rules means you can be more effective from the start of your term and build out a successful strategic plan for the future!

Join us for CLEO’s Strategy Academy: You Won Your Election, Now What? in Bakersfield on Tuesday, February 18, 2025 from 6:30-8:00 p.m. This is a free training presented by California Local Elected Officials for newly elected and veteran local officials.

Learn how to:
* Run efficient meetings
* Understand Robert's Rules and the Brown Act
* Build relationships and coalitions
* Put long-term strategic planning into action

Register for the Academy ([link removed])
[link removed]
Register now for CPC’s fourth annual Parents, Not Partisans Summit 2025 — California at the Crossroads of Education — March 18-19, 2025 in Sacramento! This is your opportunity to join parent group leaders, education reform advocates and school board members from across the state as we chart the course for meaningful education reform.

Join us for this transformative two-day event to hear from state legislators, policy experts and education reform leaders on the critical topics that will shape the future of California’s classrooms.

Register today — and be a part of our most impactful summit yet!

Register for the Summit ([link removed])
New Podcasts ()
[link removed]


** Radio Free California #376: Trump-Proof . . . Poof!
------------------------------------------------------------

On the latest podcast from CPC President Will Swaim and CPC board member David Bahnsen: State Dems have abandoned Newsom’s $50 million campaign to weaponize nonprofits in a war on Trump. Sen. Scott Wiener wants to bail out insurers — by forcing them to sue the oil companies he says are responsible for state wildfires. California officials are scrambling to respond to Trump initiatives. Listen now. ([link removed])

[link removed]


** Radio Free California #375: Exxon Strikes Back
------------------------------------------------------------

In a double-barreled special episode, California Justice Center attorney Julie Hamill explains ExxonMobil’s legal case against California Attorney General Rob Bonta, and Seneca Scott lifts the lid on his hometown of Oakland. Listen now. ([link removed])

More from CPC ()


** California Fires Don’t Justify An Energy Industry Shakedown
------------------------------------------------------------

State Sen. Scott Wiener this week introduced Senate Bill 222. He hopes to bail out property insurers already damaged by the state’s dysfunctional insurance market by pitting them against the oil industry. CPC President Will Swaim examines the massive logical gaps in the senator’s bill in his latest article in ([link removed]) National Review ([link removed]) . ([link removed])


** Time To Bring California Out Of The Municipal Reporting Stone Age
------------------------------------------------------------

When it comes to modernizing state and municipal government financial reporting, the Golden State is stuck in the digital stone age. CPC's Andrew Davenport explains why California should take the lead in advancing the latest technology, machine-readable formats, and catch up with the private sector. Read the article. ([link removed])
SUPPORT CPC ([link removed])

============================================================

ABOUT THE CALIFORNIA POLICY CENTER

The California Policy Center promotes prosperity for all Californians through limited government and individual liberty.

Learn more at ** CaliforniaPolicyCenter.org ([link removed])
.
** Twitter ([link removed])
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Instagram ([link removed])
Copyright © 2025 California Policy Center, All rights reserved.
We send periodic updates to those who opted in on californiapolicycenter.org

Our mailing address is:
California Policy Center
18002 Irvine Blvd Ste 108
Tustin, CA 92780-3321
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]