I will watch the debates on one condition
I'm happy to hear President Joe Biden wants to eliminate the live audience for his debates with ex-President Trump. Any audience would be comprised of partisans, rooting for their guy or worse yet, uncommitted voters who, after eight years, are still too thick to know the difference. I’m also glad both candidates want to bypass the Commission on Presidential Debates, with their “past struggles to keep candidates from violating the debate rules.” Still, I will watch these debates only if they take one additional step: put the microphones on an auto timer. When the speaking candidate's allotted time is up – the mic turns off; their live audio feed goes silent. That is the only way to stop the candidates from rambling on past their time. Also, when one candidate is speaking, the other candidate's mic should be off and there should be no “reaction shots” on camera of the non-speaking candidate. This is not theater. This is serious. I don’t want to hear a cheering/jeering crowd; I don’t want to hear snide remarks. I want to hear the candidates – uninterrupted, and in equal measure.
Bob DePugh, Cathedral City
On one's very private/personal info
I’ve been reading that our electric companies in California could start to charge their residential customers monthly fees based on their level of income. Looks like it will be in tiers with low-income residents paying less per month and going up as one's income is higher. Not based on what you use, but how much money you make. Seems like another "pay your fair share" approach.
If the state can share one's income with utility companies or any companies that is very worrisome. Why would a resident want/allow people in their utility company to know their income? That is very scary. It could spread to residential water, gas and trash companies in the near future. After that, who knows? When you go to a market, restaurant or department store, have cable TV, Wi-Fi and phone services, will the cost of goods or services be based on your income? How can one's income be available to electric companies soon and who knows what companies in the future? The state's tax-paying residents should be the ones who disclose income levels if necessary and they must not be mandated.
Looks like other entities could have access to our most sensitive and private financial info. This is outrageous and needs your response to your elected personnel. This action may raise the potential for identity theft.
Barry Morgan, Rancho Mirage
Is it wrong for oil companies make money?
A person wrote in whining about the "profits" made by oil companies. Went on to say that Newsom should do something. I have a couple of questions: Why didn't he tell us what the sales were that showed these profits? If they only represented 4-5% of the sales, is that wrong? And what about our "special" gasoline that is demanded by the greenies in summertime? Doesn't the changeover cost us money? And how many new refineries have been built in the last 50 years? None in California. Why is that? Could it be the One Party Rule we have here? Because Gov. Newsom and friends vow to shut down gas-driven cars, would you invest your money in a new refinery? I didn't think so, either.
Neil Mahony, Cathedral City
This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: I will watch the debates on one condition
