How Big-Government Regulation Contributed to California's Wildfires

American Thinker  . . . "If, according to the proponents of big government at the Sacramento Bee, a random explosion at a fertilizer plant in West must signify the failures of small-government policies and low regulation, why do the persistent catastrophic wildfires in California's forests not represent the failures of comparably big-government regulation?
"In truth, there was nothing, then or now, to suggest that more regulations upon industry at the federal or state level might have prevented the calamity in West.  It was, in fact, later determined to have been caused by a criminal act, therefore it was a horrifying anomaly.  There is, however, plenty to suggest that the irresponsibility of bloated federal and state government bureaucracies' impositions of regulations has led to the destructive extent of the wildfires in California.
"Fires are nothing new in California, and there's something of an interesting history to them that used to not be nearly as tragic as we see today.  Chuck DeVore, vice president of national initiatives at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, reminds his readers at Forbes that as "a citizen soldier in the California National Guard for two decades, I often heard the gallows humor that California's four seasons were: flood, fire, earthquake, and riot."
"DeVore takes to task the editorial board at the Sacramento Bee for their commentary around the Carr Fire of 2018, in which they suggested that the recent fires are the result of "climate change, for real and in real time." . . .

"Excused from this conversation? Who the heck talks like that?"
         Gavin Newsom

You don’t believe in climate change. You are excused from this conversation. https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1190995034163892226 …

. . . "What the reply served to tell Trump was that Newsom wasn't prepared to defend his bad policy positions, probably because he was still feeling the voter heat. Instead of defend himself, he told Trump to shut up. He apparently knew that anything of substance that he might say would be held against him by the state's angry voters. If he tried to blather on about global warming while his constituents' houses were burning, he'd be in a world of trouble." . . .