Angels’ Brandon Drury has his father to thank for career turnaround

• June 18, 2023

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — It’s fitting that Brandon Drury reached Father’s Day playing his best baseball of the season, because he said he owes his father for helping to turn around his career.

Drury had hit .205 with a .600 OPS over three straight years from 2018-20, seasons that he now calls “awful.”

That’s when Drury went to his father, who is not a coach but had been his coach, and rebuilt his swing, back to what it had been before he made some ill-advised changes.

“I scratched all that launch angle stuff and went back to my dad,” Drury said on Sunday. “Let’s just do whatever we have to do to get back to being a good hitter again.”

Drury, who was with the Toronto Blue Jays for much of those lean years, said he didn’t even care about power.

“I just wanted to be a solid player and help the team win,” he said.

In 2021, with the New York Mets, Drury had a .783 OPS, and he improved on that last season, hitting 28 homers with an .813 OPS with the Cincinnati Reds and San Diego Padres.

After Drury, 30, signed a two-year, $17-million deal with the Angels this season, he has hit 12 homers with an .809 OPS.

Drury slumped for the first three weeks of the season, but since then he has produced a .934 OPS over his last 45 games. This weekend in Kansas City, he he hit three homers and drove in five runs in the first two games. The Angels now have him hitting cleanup, behind Mike Trout and Shohei Ohtani.

“He’s been huge,” manager Phil Nevin said. “Bargainwise, find me a better free-agent pickup so far. He’s gotta be in the talk to maybe play in that game (the All-Star Game) in July, with the company he’s in. He’s been fantastic for us. He’s meant a lot to that group. He’s been a big part of that room.”

Drury said he still talks to his dad regularly to help keep his swing where he wants it.

“He’s my coach,” Drury said. “He watches all my at-bats. We talk a lot about the game and what he sees. He’s seen me at my best and my worst so I really lean on him.”

SCHEDULE BREAK

Nevin said he has been focused all season on getting to this point in schedule in a good position, because this is the beginning of a much more friendly stretch.

No team in baseball has played on more days than the Angels. (The Tampa Bay Rays have played one more game, but they had a doubleheader.) The Angels have also had two trips that took them to the East Coast so far.

This week the Angels have two off days around a two-game series against the Dodgers. They have a three-game trip to Colorado next weekend, and then they don’t leave California or get on a plane until after their July 23 game. Their only road games are in San Diego and at Dodger Stadium.

The Angels have only three more weeks without an off day.

“If we’re .500 or a little better after the way this has gone, we’re in a good position regardless of who’s in front of us because the schedule does lighten up for us for the next month and a half,” said Nevin, whose team came into Sunday’s game with a 40-33 record.

Nevin reiterated that he’s not referring to the quality of the opponents, but to the travel and frequency of off days.

“I’m not complaining,” Nevin said. “Our travel’s easy. We have nice planes. We get nice hotels. But at the end of the day on your body, the clock and everything, it does take its toll. It’s never anything we use as an excuse. I’m just saying after today I feel like for the next month we’re in a good position.”

ROTATION UPDATE

The Angels had planned to give Reid Detmers and their other starers some extra time off after their last turns, but they changed plans after seeing how Detmers pitched against the Texas Rangers earlier this week.

Detmers will now start on Tuesday against the Dodgers and Clayton Kershaw, followed by Ohtani on Wednesday. That leaves Patrick Sandoval, Griffin Canning and Tyler Anderson to work next weekend in Colorado.

The Angels will not need No. 6 starter Jaime Barría until June 28, so he is available in the bullpen in the meantime.

NOTES

Left-hander Matt Moore threw a bullpen session on Sunday, and Nevin said “he threw the ball great.” If he continues to progress well, he could be back by the end of the month. …

Mike Trout and Ohtani homered in the same game for the 28th time, which tied Tim Salmon and Garret Anderson for the second most of any duo in Angels history. Trout and Albert Pujols (48 times) hold the club record. …

Outfielder Hunter Renfroe has impressed Nevin in a couple days of workouts at first base. “Of all the guys that I took over there to kind of introduce to the position since I’ve been here, I think he’s the one that looks more the part than anyone,” Nevin said. Although Taylor Ward played first in an emergency earlier this week, Nevin said “I don’t think Taylor really feels comfortable there.” Renfroe could get some opportunities at first because Jared Walsh is struggling and Gio Urshela is injured. …

Infielder David Fletcher returned to the lineup with Triple-A Salt Lake on Sunday. Fletcher had been on bereavement leave.

UP NEXT

Angels (LHP Reid Detmers, 1-5, 4.48) vs. Dodgers (LHP Clayton Kershaw, 8-4, 2.95), Tuesday, 7:07 p.m., Angel Stadium, Bally Sports West,  830 AM.

Related Articles

​ Orange County Register 

Gov. Newsom and the state’s prison guard union

• June 18, 2023

For years, the California Legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom have signed off on lucrative and unjustified contracts for the state prison guard union, despite warnings from the non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office that legally required compensation studies were not being conducted. Now, the Newsom administration is pulling a fast one on California taxpayers with a flawed study to justify big giveaways to the prison guard union.

In 2019, while analyzing a proposed contract to give raises to the prison guard union, the LAO advised the Legislature that there was “no evident justification for proposed salary increase.”

Partly, that’s because the state failed to provide a legally required compensation study comparing prison guard union pay to comparable public and private employees for the Legislature to consider.

The last time such a report was produced, in 2015, using 2013 data, the LAO noted, the report found that California’s prison guards “received total compensation that was 40 percent higher than their local government counterparts.”

The Legislature ignored these warnings.

In 2021, coincidentally around the time of Gov. Newsom’s recall (in which the prison guard union dumped millions to defend him), the Legislature was again reminded of the need for a compensation study.

Again, the Legislature ignored the warnings from the LAO and  overwhelmingly approved a lucrative new contract for the prison guard union.

In January 2022, good government group Govern for California released its own compensation study for the California prison guard union.

Their conclusion?

“Using statistical methods to control for differences in education, experience, and other demographic factors, California correctional officer wages are about 55 percent higher than national average correctional officer wages (including California in the average) and 57 percent higher than other states,” they found.

California’s prison guards also benefit from generous pension and retiree healthcare benefits, which exceed national norms.

This is overall consistent with the state’s compensation study using 2013 data.

And yet, in April of this year, the state finally generated a compensation study, which compared prison guard pay to the pay of deputy sheriffs in counties like Los Angeles and Orange. As you might expect, deputy sheriffs make more than prison guards, giving the prison guard union ammunition and the Legislature cover, if they take it, to give the prison guard union lavish raises.

What happened here?

Related Articles

Well, as the LAO last month, the Newsom administration decided to use a different methodology from past compensation studies. “This methodology was crafted through negotiations between the administration and the union,” the LAO notes.

In a statement to this editorial board, Govern for California criticized the study, calling it “wholly inadequate because it compares unequal occupations.”

Govern for California has called on the California Legislature “to hold the line in the next contract, which will come into effect upon the expiration of the current contract on July 2” of this year.

We echo this call from Govern for California.

The California Legislature must not fall for the cynical games played by Gov. Newsom and the prison guard union.

​ Orange County Register 

Successful Aging: More fresh perspectives on longevity

• June 18, 2023

Last week, we presented some new perspectives on longevity based on the work of Laura Carstensen, director of the Stanford Center on Longevity.  

Carsten and her colleagues developed something called the New Map of Life that encourages us to make a “mind shift” in how we think about longevity. Its goal is to offer a new narrative of an aging society, from the crisis narrative of the “gray tsunami” to defining actionable steps that enhance the quality of longer lives. It envisions engineering an entire life course with at least 30 more years of vitality and engagement.

This new map of life is guided by 10 principles. We described the first five last week.  Here are the remaining ones. 

Learning throughout a lifetime: Getting a formal education prior to our working years was considered a one-time event before starting a lifetime job. That’s not the case today – or for those five-year-olds who will live to be age 100. The new map of life suggests we no longer will be front-loading education. Rather, the authors envision options for learning outside traditional formal education available to people of all ages and life stages so they can acquire the education they need. That learning experience will align with their individual needs, interests, abilities, schedules and budgets and will spread out through the life course. 

Working more years with more flexibility: The New Map of Life predicts that within the 100-year life, we can expect to work 60 years. However, that may not be within the traditional 40-hour workweek. What is more likely is people will move in and out of the workplace, working from home periodically, taking paid and unpaid leaves for caregiving, education, health needs and other transitions that we cannot even predict at this time. 

Starting early on financial security: Living to age 100 requires new opportunities and pathways to work, save and retire. The financial challenges of the 100-year life take into consideration today’s financial age-related challenges. Currently, more than half of Americans have little or no retirement savings. And we know that without Medicare and Society Security, one-third of older adults would live below the poverty line. The New Map of Life wants to create more opportunities to build financial security with an understanding of the social and economic trends and the upcoming realities. 

Building longevity-ready communities: Where we live matters. Our physical environment affects longevity and the quality of life beginning before birth.  The environmental opportunities and assets will determine the likelihood that “individuals will be physically active, whether they will be socially isolated or engaged and how likely they will develop obesity, respiratory, cardiovascular or neurodegenerative diseases.” The advantages and disadvantages accumulate over the life course.  

Creating age-diverse communities is good for societies and the bottom line. The combination of the “olders” and “youngers” is a net gain; both contribute in different ways. Older people typically have the emotional intelligence, experience and wisdom from years of living that create new possibilities for families, communities and workplaces that have not previously existed. Younger people contribute speed, strength and zest for discovery according to the report. Today, we know that a multigenerational workforce drives innovation, problem-solving, productivity and more. The “changing mindset” is not to dwell on the costs of aging but rather reap the rewards of an age-diverse society.   

Creating the needed change to maximize these 30 years is the big question. It is not the responsibility of any one entity.  According to the report, building this new extended life is a shared responsibility among the government, the private sector, employers, healthcare providers and insurance companies. It will require the best ideas from the private sector, government, medicine, academia and medicine. The report says it is not enough to just think or reimagine this life. What’s important is to build and “build it fast.” The future of those five-year-olds is in our hands; it will require new policies, investments and a positive mindset to make the most of those 30 bonus years.  

Let’s consider what we can do today in our communities, with family and friends to take advantage of the bonus years we currently are experiencing. Policies and programs count.  However, it all begins with a belief that change for the good is possible and that we have a role to play, as family members, volunteers, elected officials, educators, voters and more. We all have the potential to be influencers and agents of change.  Small changes add up.     

Let’s all live long and well.  And let’s spread those random acts of kindness. 

Helen Dennis is a nationally recognized leader on issues of aging and the new retirement with academic, corporate and nonprofit experience. Contact Helen with your questions and comments at [email protected].  Visit Helen at HelenMdennis.com and follow her on facebook.com/SuccessfulAgingCommunity

Related Articles

​ Orange County Register 

Senior Moments: Giving myself a gift to cherish this Father’s Day

• June 18, 2023

The lavender dress was hanging on a window latch in my girlhood bedroom. 

I inherited the room upon the unexpected arrival of my little brother eight years after I was born. A small converted den, the room had French doors that opened into the living room.

Absent a closet, I sometimes hung my clothes on the latches of the open-in casement windows.

I had hung my new lavender chiffon dress there on the morning of my friend’s Bar Mitzvah. The evening party was to be a fancy affair. Because he was the son of a family friend, I was attending with my parents.

As I stood there, admiring my new dress with the smocked bodice that fell into a softly pleated skirt, there was a knock at the front door which was next to my room.

I never remember that first house we lived in having a doorbell. Visitors always knocked. 

I opened the door to an older gentleman who said he had a delivery for a Miss Patty Bunin. Wide-eyed, I took the small box he handed me and sat down on the living room sofa to open it. My mother appeared just as I lifted the corsage from its box. Next to it was a small envelope with a note inside.

“I wanted to be the first man to give you flowers. Love, Daddy.”

Stunned, I held up what looked like a bracelet with tiny purple orchids attached to it. I looked quizzically at my mother.

“It’s a wrist corsage,” Mom said, “for you to wear to the party tonight.” 

I had mixed feelings about my father. I loved him, but I didn’t really like the person he was. 

By the time he got home from work, I had on my new dress and was wearing the flower bracelet on my wrist, feeling very grown up for a 12-year-old. My father smiled when he saw it and I gave him a careful hug so as not to smush the orchids. 

His gift set a standard that I realized years later. When I was going to prom and my date brought me a corsage, I remember feeling disappointed that it wasn’t an orchid.

That story came back to me today when I saw the orchid displays in the market.

My dad and I were at odds on many issues. Most of the time I didn’t even bother to argue with him. But I spent a lot of time resenting him. Looking back, I realize that I erected a wall that did not allow in any good traits he might have had.

One of my gifts of growing older has been recognizing the possibility of softening hardened feelings. This year on Father’s Day I am continuing a tradition I started last year — I’m giving myself the present of allowing some good memories of my father. 

I might even buy myself a tiny orchid.

Email [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter @patriciabunin and at patriciabunin.com.

Related Articles

​ Orange County Register 

Reappropriate ‘illegal immigrant’ to shine a spotlight on injustice of U.S. immigration restrictions

• June 18, 2023

Ana, a frontline nurse during the pandemic, spent over two years singularly focused on providing the best care possible for her patients and staying updated on scientific research surrounding Covid. Despite her exhaustion, she was happy to work.

Ana had put herself through nursing school and graduated with honors. She now devotes herself to her work and to building the best life possible for herself.

Originally from Central America, Ana decided to leave her country a few years ago. By her late teens, cartels had taken over her city. Cartel feuds, extortion and murder made it extremely unsafe, especially for a young woman. It was hard to focus on her education while her family faced demands from a cartel to use their business as a front to sell drugs. This environment of rampant violence and economic chaos made it impossible for an ambitious person like her to thrive.

Ana knew the ideal place to live was the U.S. because, while visiting a relative here years ago, she had seen America with her own eyes: the busy streets, the number of prosperous businesses, the safety, the abundance in the supermarket, the potential for growth — her home country paled in comparison. In America, she realized, someone like her could make the most out of life.

By any reasonable standard, Ana is an admirable person: she takes her life seriously and works hard to pursue her values. But there’s one more thing to know about Ana: she’s in the U.S. after overstaying her tourist visa. Some people call her an illegal immigrant.

But should we call people like Ana “illegal immigrants” — a term loaded with shame?

The anti-immigrant camp uses that term in an attempt to smear immigrants. Many like to paint a picture of illegal immigrants as gang members who jump the border to smuggle drugs and commit heinous crimes. But the reality is that most illegal immigrants are peaceful, hard-working people like Ana. A majority enter the U.S. on a temporary visa (which means they’ve been previously vetted like Ana), and decide to stay beyond their allotted time—which violates U.S. immigration laws.

Because of the pejorative intent of the term, it is understandable that people who think of themselves as pro-immigrant see it as offensive. Being staunchly pro-immigration, I too resisted using it, preferring euphemisms like “undocumented” or “unauthorized.” But I’ve changed my mind.

The term attempts to shame people like Ana, who come to America to work, to earn their own way, to build a better life. But the shame doesn’t lie with her—it lies with the system that is designed to keep her out.

If we rethink and repurpose the term “illegal immigrant,” we can use it to re-orient attention to this unjust system. We can use it to highlight the fact that our immigration system criminalizes the moral decision to come to America in pursuit of happiness, a system that treats wanting to work as a vice instead of a virtue. A system that criminalizes millions of people for wanting to make something out of themselves by working—something that is otherwise rightly admired in America – is un-American.

Related: Open the borders to those seeking a better life

Some people will ask: “why didn’t Ana come here legally?” Because the U.S. immigration system is designed to keep productive would-be immigrants like Ana out. Ana would have had to try to get a loan to pay thousands of dollars in fees and other visa requirements, wait out the process in her cartel-infested country and wander for years through a multilevel bureaucratic maze. And then she’d be a citizen, right? No, that’s just to gain authorization to study and work in the U.S. temporarily. And that’s only if she manages to qualify for one of a narrow list of visas in the first place. When I tell Americans about my own legal immigration story and what I had to go through, their jaws drop. The process is not feasible for a vast majority of productive people who want to live and work here, so it’s unsurprising that ambitious individuals like Ana end up immigrating illegally.

A lot of peaceful, courageous people are eager to immigrate to the U.S. in order to work to make their lives better, but the immigration system locks them out. Those who dare to come anyway are made to live their life in the shadows and in fear, because their actions are illegal.

Related Articles

We should abandon the euphemisms like “undocumented immigrants” and “unauthorized workers.” Those euphemisms imply that people like Ana have in fact done something wrong and only help mask the real problem: that these individuals are being criminalized by unjust laws for a moral decision that they made.

“Illegal immigrant” works as a smear because what it actually means is rarely put out in the open — that the presence of peaceful, hard-working people is illegal in America. It’s time we confront this shameful fact and bring clarity to the debate by using the term in the appropriate way. Repurposing it is about illuminating the injustice of the U.S. immigration system, not about abusing immigrants.

Next time you hear the term “illegal immigrant,” don’t think of gang members or think it’s derogatory to call a hard-working immigrant that. Think of Ana and just how moral and brave her decision was to come to America, and how shameful it is that our immigration laws brand her a criminal.

Agustina Vergara Cid is a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute. You can follow her on Twitter @agustinavcid

​ Orange County Register 

Federal indictment against Trump just the latest attempt to bring him down

• June 18, 2023

In 1920, nearly one million Americans voted for Socialist Party candidate Eugene V. Debs for president even though he was in a prison cell at the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary.

Debs had been convicted two years earlier of violating the Espionage Act of 1917. He was charged for giving a speech that was critical of America’s involvement in World War I. “I know of no reason why the workers should fight for what the capitalists own,” he said.

The government said he was interfering with military enrollment.

Today the Espionage Act of 1917 has been exhumed to charge former president Donald Trump, the 2024 GOP frontrunner, with 37 counts that could put him in prison for 400 years. Trump has gone up in the Republican primary polls since the indictment was announced, a development that First Lady Jill Biden called “shocking.”

Is it? Trump has been hit with baseless, false allegations non-stop since he entered politics — the pee tape, the Russia hoax, the steering wheel, the tax returns. So many accusations. So much nothing.

This federal indictment may also turn out to be nothing, because the rules for handling government documents and classified information are simply different for presidents than for anyone else who works for the government. Presidents have an absolute power to declassify anything, and there is no official process that they must follow to do so. The relevant Supreme Court case is Department of the Navy vs. Egan in 1988, in which the court said, “As Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States,” the president has the “authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security,” and this authority “flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.”

Congress did provide for presidents to determine, in their sole discretion, what materials are presidential records and what materials are personal records, and to take with them when they leave the White House whatever personal records they choose to keep. The law is the Presidential Records Act of 1978, and the relevant case is Judicial Watch, Inc. v. National Archives and Records Administration, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, in 2012.

In this case, Judicial Watch had filed a Freedom of Information Act request for audio tapes of President Bill Clinton, which were recorded by historian Taylor Branch. The tape recorder in the room sometimes captured Clinton’s half of telephone conversations. Judicial Watch demanded that the court declare these tapes “presidential records” under the Presidential Records Act and order the National Archives to take control of the tapes and make them available at the Clinton Presidential Library.

But that didn’t happen.

President Clinton had determined the tapes to be personal records under the Presidential Records Act and he kept them in his sock drawer, a location not under the control of the National Archives and Records Administration. Under the PRA, NARA had no power to override the president’s determination that the tapes were personal records.

And neither did the court.

“The question of whether a court can review a records classification decision under the PRA is not as open and shut as either side suggests,” wrote Judge Amy Berman Jackson.

Citing 44 U.S.C. Section 2203(b), Judge Jackson wrote, “Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President’s term and in his sole discretion.” And further, “Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records.”

The whole subject of presidential records management has been complicated by litigation ever since the end of the Nixon administration. However, there’s no dispute that while he was president, Trump had the authority to declassify anything, to make the determination of what records were personal, and to take the personal records with him when he left the White House. No one had the authority to override his decision. And the National Archives had no legal control over the personal records in Trump’s home.

So why did the FBI raid Mar-a-Lago? The House Judiciary Committee is trying to get answers to that question. The Biden administration has not been cooperative.

The FBI says it found documents “with classification markings” at Mar-a-Lago, but documents with classification markings are not necessarily classified documents. The burden of proof is on the government.

Related Articles

In between the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Presidential Records Act of 1978, there’s another set of laws from the early years of the Cold War, when the modern system of national security classification was created. Trump was not charged under the classification laws, which prohibit negligence or gross negligence in the handling of classified material. The indictment charges Trump with willful retention of national defense information as defined, or not defined, in the Espionage Act.

Perhaps the reason has something to do with all the high-ranking government officials who have not been charged for negligent handling of classified information, none of whom were covered by the Presidential Records Act. As a U.S. senator and as vice president, Joe Biden improperly retained classified documents and kept them in his home, office and garage. Awkward.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was so negligent with classified information that some of it ended up on the computer Anthony Weiner used to send sexting messages to teens he met on the internet. Yet there were no search warrants for Chappaqua, and no charges for Clinton.

President Warren G. Harding eventually commuted the sentence of his imprisoned and defeated Socialist Party opponent, Eugene Debs. Today, Debs is remembered for his anti-war speech, and Harding is remembered for the Teapot Dome bribery scandal.

If history doesn’t repeat itself, it certainly rhymes trying.

Write [email protected] and follow her on Twitter @Susan_Shelley

​ Orange County Register 

Sacramento’s harmful policies drive the California exodus

• June 18, 2023

As the exodus of Californians and their businesses continues apace, Gov. Gavin Newsom denies reality, downplaying the flow of people and companies from his state as inconsequential. 

But the facts are well-documented — and grim: from January 2020 to July 2022, the state lost 600,000 people. That’s more than the population of Wyoming. The loss has been so severe that California lost a congressional seat for the first time in its history. Without a major change of direction, hundreds of thousands of individuals and scores of businesses will continue the flight from California.

Thanks, then, to the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce for acknowledging a problem Newsom can’t see — and for assessing the ways in which bad governance is responsible for the outmigration. Reading the 68-page document leads one to a simple conclusion: Government must do less.

The report features a compilation of interviews the Chamber conducted with 23 California CEOs who aren’t named. That offer (or demand) of anonymity is evidence enough of business leaders’ anxiety about the state’s reputation for hostility to free enterprise; who wants to criticize regulators in a state with a reputation for seeking and destroying business? The 23 CEOs describe their difficulties in detail, with one summarizing the sense of others thusly: “I have dealt with governments around the country, but the most business unfriendly [and] adversarial government is California.” 

The CEOs cite a long list of reasons businesses are leaving, including high tax rates, the burdensome regulatory environment, high energy costs, inadequate infrastructure, and the state’s out-of-control homeless crisis. Each of these problems can be traced back to state and local government policies, and that accounts for the Tax Foundation’s 2023 State Business Tax Climate Index (cited in the report) that ranks California as 48th in the nation for corporate, individual, property, and sales tax rates. 

Overzealous environmental regulation, particularly the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), is described in the Chamber report as “extraordinarily cumbersome.” Gov. Newsom has recently recognized the need to reform CEQA, which is notorious for tying up construction projects for years. But, perhaps unsurprisingly, Newsom’s proposed reform would exempt only government infrastructure programs from the disastrous law. Everybody else can labor beneath the dead weight of CEQA — or, as many have, simply leave the state altogether.

Add to that California’s far-fetched climate experiments, like the war on gas stoves, the untenable shift to wind and solar energy, a ban on the sale of gas-powered vehicles by 2035 (further threatening California’s already stressed power grid), and energy regulations that hit Californians with highest-in-the-nation costs for gasoline, natural gas and electricity.

California hosts half of the nation’s homeless population despite exorbitant state spending on “solutions” — $20 billion in just the past four years. This is on top of wildly expensive local government programs, like Los Angeles’ failing Measure HHH bonds. That program spends $800,000 for each unit of homeless housing, well above market cost.

The CEOs told the Chamber that solutions to the homeless crisis “have not been forthcoming” from urban politicians. Meanwhile, businesses bear the cost when patrons avoid high-vagrancy areas. 

Related Articles

So what can California do to end the madness? Just do less. The Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce report recommends a lighter regulatory touch, one that recognizes the regional variations in industry. Silicon Valley has different economic needs than the Central Valley; Inland Empire logistics firms aren’t LA’s aerospace, video production, and apparel firms; San Diego’s biotech industry definitely ain’t Hollywood. Trying to engineer a one-size-fits-all regulatory regime managed in Sacramento will stifle these important, organic regional variations.

The report doesn’t explain every issue perfectly. It concludes that “modern urban work-life amenities,” such as recreation opportunities, are necessary to attract workers and businesses. To many, that will sound like a call for the state to do more to “improve quality of life.” Rather, it ought to be a reminder that leaders ought to execute only their legitimate responsibilities — like improving public safety, cutting taxes, and reducing regulation. Ultimately, politicians should step back – should do less – and let individuals manage their own lives. The quality of life will improve when California tries a little human liberty. 

Even then, the reputational damage has been deep and broad. The results of a do-less campaign will take years before business leaders recover their faith in California. 

Sheridan Swanson is a research manager at the California Policy Center.

​ Orange County Register 

Mike Trout, Shohei Ohtani hit back-to-back homers in Angels’ win

• June 18, 2023

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — No one expected Mike Trout’s puzzling to slump to last as long as it has, and now perhaps it’s finally over.

Trout homered just after Shohei Ohtani put the Angels up with a two-run homer in the fifth inning of the Angels’ 5-2 victory over the Kansas City Royals on Sunday afternoon.

Ohtani, who leads the majors with 24 homers, has been sizzling for a month, while the Angels have been waiting for Trout to join him.

Even with only one of their sluggers slugging, the Angels had been winning, now with 11 victories in their last 14 games to bring a 41-33 record back home for a two-game series against the Dodgers. The Angels pulled ahead of the Houston Astros, into second place in the American League West and sole possession a wild card spot.

The leader during the hot streak has been Ohtani, who hit seven homers in the Angels’ seven-game trip. Meanwhile, many around the Angels were quietly — or not so quietly — concerned about Trout.

Trout came into the game hitting .252 with an .820 OPS, well below his career averages of .300 and .993. Over the previous 42 games, he’d hit .207 with a .687 OPS, with no homers since June 7.

“I was never worried about it at all,” Manager Phil Nevin said. “I’ve seen this before. Just as any good player goes through some struggles, compounded a little bit because it was every single day. He put in a lot of work. He kind of backed off his work. He added some work. The fact is he’s healthy.”

Trout has said all along that he’s feeling good, and he shrugged at various times during the cold streak, saying that either his timing or pitch-recognition was not what it normally is.

He said it finally started to feel right on Saturday, when he doubled, singled and walked, with a single on a 99 mph fastball from Aroldis Chapman.

“I felt like myself,” Trout reiterated on Sunday.

The difference?

“I think the biggest thing is I wasn’t loading, I was just gliding forward,” Trout said. “I had nothing behind it. That’s why I was under everything. Just trusting my work these last couple days. It’s been great.”

Sunday, Trout drew a walk from veteran Zack Greinke in the first inning. In the fourth, he yanked a double into left field. And in the fifth, just after Ohtani had homered to put the Angels up 3-2, Trout pulled his 15th homer of the season over the left field fence.

In the ninth, another struggling Angels hitter, Jared Walsh, hit a homer to give the Angels an insurance run. Walsh, who missed the first quarter of the season after dealing with neurological issues, had been hitting .111.

It was enough for a victory for Angels starter Tyler Anderson, who gave up two runs in five innings.

Although the left-hander has a 5.64 ERA, he has managed to get through at least five innings with the Angels in the game or ahead regularly. The Angels are 9-4 in his 13 starts.

“When I’m not pitching my best, which I haven’t been, just try to give us a chance to stay in the game,” Anderson said.

This time they were able to turn the game over to Jaime Barría in the sixth inning. Barria is the Angels No. 6 starter, but they have two off days this week, so they are able to use him out of the bullpen for now.

The Angels needed a fresh arm in the bullpen after the relievers were worked heavily earlier this week in Texas, which may have contributed to their meltdown on Saturday in Kansas City.

Barria worked three scoreless innings, and then closer Carlos Estévez pitched the ninth to pick up his 19th save in 19 tries. Estévez equaled the Angels record by converting his first 19 save opportunities of the season.

It sent the Angels into a happy clubhouse, having quickly put Saturday’s nightmare behind them with a victory, and also with the confidence that perhaps now they’ll have both of their stars hitting.

“You can’t win games with just two guys,” Nevin said, “but I think if there were any two back-to-back in this league that can do it, it’s those two that can carry a team for quite a while… When your superstars step up in big places, it gives everyone else around lot of confidence. We know we can compete with anybody.”

Related Articles

​ Orange County Register