How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page
Lake County News,California
  • Home
    • Registration Form
  • News
    • Education
    • Veterans
    • Community
      • Obituaries
      • Letters
      • Commentary
    • Police Logs
    • Business
    • Recreation
    • Health
    • Religion
    • Legals
    • Arts & Life
    • Regional
  • Calendar
  • Contact us
    • FAQs
    • Phones, E-Mail
    • Subscribe
  • Advertise Here
  • Login
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page

News

PBS and NPR are generally unbiased, independent of government propaganda and provide key benefits to US democracy

Details
Written by: Stephanie A. (Sam) Martin, Boise State University
Published: 22 July 2025

Congress’ cuts to public broadcasting will diminish the range and volume of the free press and the independent reporting it provides. MicroStockHub-iStock/Getty Images Plus

Champions of the almost entirely party-line vote in the U.S. Senate to erase US$1.1 billion in already approved funds for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting called their action a refusal to subsidize liberal media.

“Public broadcasting has long been overtaken by partisan activists,” said U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, insisting there is no need for government to fund what he regards as biased media. “If you want to watch the left-wing propaganda, turn on MSNBC,” Cruz said.

Accusing the media of liberal bias has been a consistent conservative complaint since the civil rights era, when white Southerners insisted news outlets were slanting their stories against segregation. During his presidential campaign in 1964, U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater of Arizona complained that the media was against him, an accusation that has been repeated by every Republican presidential candidate since.

But those charges of bias rarely survive empirical scrutiny.

As chair of a public policy institute devoted to strengthening deliberative democracy, I have written two books about the media and the presidency, and another about media ethics. My research traces how news institutions shape civic life and why healthy democracies rely on journalism that is independent of both market pressure and partisan talking points.

That independence in the United States – enshrined in the press freedom clause of the First Amendment – gives journalists the ability to hold government accountable, expose abuses of power and thereby support democracy.

A gray-haired man with a beard and wearing a blue jacket and tie, talks in a large room.
GOP Sen. Ted Cruz speaks to reporters as Senate Republicans vote on President Donald Trump’s request to cancel about $9 billion in foreign aid and public broadcasting spending on July 16, 2025. AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Trusting independence

Ad Fontes Media, a self-described “public benefit company” whose mission is to rate media for credibility and bias, have placed the reporting of “PBS NewsHour” under 10 points left of the ideological center. They label it as both “reliable” and based in “analysis/fact.” “Fox and Friends,” by contrast, the popular morning show on Fox News, is nearly 20 points to the right. The scale starts at zero and runs 42 points to the left to measure progressive bias and 42 points to the right to measure conservative bias. Ratings are provided by three-person panels comprising left-, right- and center-leaning reviewers.

A 2020 peer-reviewed study in Science Advances that tracked more than 6,000 political reporters likewise found “no evidence of liberal media bias” in the stories they chose to cover, even though most journalists are more left-leaning than the rest of the population.

A similar 2016 study published in Public Opinion Quarterly said that media are more similar than dissimilar and, excepting political scandals, “major news organizations present topics in a largely nonpartisan manner, casting neither Democrats nor Republicans in a particularly favorable or unfavorable light.”

Surveys show public media’s audiences do not see it as biased. A national poll of likely voters released July 14, 2025, found that 53% of respondents trust public media to report news “fully, accurately and fairly,” while only 35% extend that trust to “the media in general.” A majority also opposed eliminating federal support.

Contrast these numbers with attitudes about public broadcasters such as MTVA in Hungary or the TVP in Poland, where the state controls most content. Protests in Budapest October 2024 drew thousands demanding an end to “propaganda.” Oxford’s Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism reports that TVP is the least trusted news outlet in the country.

While critics sometimes conflate American public broadcasting with state-run outlets, the structures are very different.

Safeguards for editorial freedom

In state-run media systems, a government agency hires editors, dictates coverage and provides full funding from the treasury. Public officials determine – or make up – what is newsworthy. Individual media operations survive only so long as the party in power is happy.

Public broadcasting in the U.S. works in almost exactly the opposite way: The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a private nonprofit with a statutory “firewall” that forbids political interference.

More than 70% of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting’s federal appropriation for 2025 of US$1.1 billion flows through to roughly 1,500 independently governed local stations, most of which are NPR or PBS affiliates but some of which are unaffiliated community broadcasters. CPB headquarters retains only about 5% of that federal funding.

Stations survive by combining this modest federal grant money with listener donations, underwriting and foundation support. That creates a diversified revenue mix that further safeguards their editorial freedom.

And while stations share content, each also has latitude when it comes to programming and news coverage, especially at the local level.

As a public-private partnership, individual communities mostly own the public broadcasting system and its affiliate stations. Congress allocates funds, while community nonprofits, university boards, state authorities or other local license holders actually own and run the stations. Individual monthly donors are often called “members” and sometimes have voting rights in station-governance matters. Membership contributions make up the largest share of revenue for most stations, providing another safeguard for editorial independence.

Two people inside a radio studio, sitting at a long table-desk combination.
A host and guest in July 2024 sit inside a recording studio at KMXT, the public radio station on Kodiak Island in Alaska. Nathaniel Herz/Northern Journal

Broadly shared civic commons

And then there are public media’s critical benefits to democracy itself.

A 2021 report from the European Broadcasting Union links public broadcasting with higher voter turnout, better factual knowledge and lower susceptibility to extremist rhetoric.

Experts warn that even small cuts will exacerbate an already pernicious problem with political disinformation in the U.S., as citizens lose access to free information that fosters media literacy and encourages trust across demographics.

In many ways, public media remains the last broadly shared civic commons. It is both commercial-free and independently edited.

Another study, by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School in 2022, affirmed that “countries with independent and well-funded public broadcasting systems also consistently have stronger democracies.”

The study highlighted how public media works to bridge divides and foster understanding across polarized groups. Unlike commercial media, where the profit motive often creates incentives to emphasize conflict and sensationalism, public media generally seeks to provide balanced perspectives that encourage dialogue and mutual respect. Reports are often longer and more in-depth than those by other news outlets.

Such attention to nuance provides a critical counterweight to the fragmented, often hyperpartisan news bubbles that pervade cable news and social media. And this skillful, more balanced treatment helps to ameliorate political polarization and misinformation.

In all, public media’s unique structure and mission make democracy healthier in the U.S. and across the world. Public media prioritizes education and civic enlightenment. It gives citizens important tools for navigating complex issues to make informed decisions – whether those decisions are about whom to vote for or about public policy itself. Maintaining and strengthening public broadcasting preserves media diversity and advances important principles of self-government.

Congress’ cuts to public broadcasting will diminish the range and volume of the free press and the independent reporting it provides. Ronald Reagan once described a free press as vital for the United States to succeed in its “noble experiment in self-government.” From that perspective, more independent reporting – not less – will prove the best remedy for any worry about partisan spin.The Conversation

Stephanie A. (Sam) Martin, Frank and Bethine Church Endowed Chair of Public Affairs, Boise State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Legislators oppose Trump administration’s attempt to undermine church-state separation

Details
Written by: LAKE COUNTY NEWS REPORTS
Published: 22 July 2025

Last week, Congressional Freethought Caucus Co-Chairs Jared Huffman (CA-02) and Jamie Raskin (MD-08) led their colleagues in a letter to Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Billy Long expressing concerns regarding the Trump administration’s recent court filing that undermines the constitutional separation of church and state.

The filing signals that Trump can allow churches to endorse or oppose political candidates from the pulpit — blatantly violating the 70-year-old Johnson Amendment while still maintaining their tax-exempt status. 

The legislators contend that the motion is a strikingly inaccurate reinterpretation of current U.S. laws that help reconcile and harmonize our nation’s core principles of free speech, free exercise of religion, and the separation between church and state.

In their letter to Commissioner Long, the lawmakers demand that the IRS immediately reconsider its motion and remedy its failure to enforce the Johnson Amendment in accordance with longstanding legal interpretations and statutory requirements.

“As members of the Congressional Freethought Caucus, we urge you to reconsider the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) decision to propose the deeply flawed proposed settlement in the matter of National Religious Broadcasters Association et al v. Long. We strongly disagree with the stunningly inaccurate reinterpretation of the Johnson Amendment adopted in this proposed settlement,” the lawmakers wrote. “Congress passed the Johnson Amendment 70 years ago to reconcile and harmonize our nation’s core principles of free speech, free exercise of religion and the separation between church and state. This proposed settlement now threatens to upend and unravel that careful and delicate balance.”

The lawmakers continued, “When writing the tax code in 1954 to establish guardrails around organizational tax exemption, Congress included the Johnson Amendment without any extended discussion or debate. It was noncontroversial and widely supported precisely because it established reasonable boundaries between partisan politics and tax-exempt religious exercise. Under the Johnson Amendment, houses of worship are protected from government interference by securing tax exemptions while taxpayers are protected from being compelled to subsidize religious institutions’ political speech.”

“It is therefore deeply troubling that the IRS, in supporting the flawed arguments made by the plaintiffs in this case, accepts the false opposition that the religious Right has tried to create between the First Amendment’s Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses,” the lawmakers added.

In addition to Reps. Huffman and Raskin, the letter was signed by Reps. Yassamin Ansari, Becca Balint, Suzanne Bonamici, Julia Brownley, Greg Casar, Sean Casten, Lizzie Fletcher, Laura Friedman, Robert Garcia, Pramila Jayapal, Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Mark Pocan, Delia C. Ramirez, Emily Randall, Andrea Salinas, Rashida Tlaib, and Nydia Velázquez.

The Congressional Freethought Caucus is an interfaith group of members dedicated to advocating for religious freedom, church-state separation, and public policies based on science and reason.

Read the full letter below.

Mr. Billy Long
Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service
Internal Revenue Service
1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20222

Honorable Commissioner Long:

As members of the Congressional Freethought Caucus, we urge you to reconsider the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) decision to propose the deeply flawed proposed settlement in the matter of National Religious Broadcasters Association et al v. Long. We strongly disagree with the stunningly inaccurate reinterpretation of the Johnson Amendment adopted in this proposed settlement. Congress passed the Johnson Amendment 70 years ago to reconcile and harmonize our nation’s core principles of free speech, free exercise of religion and the separation between church and state. This proposed settlement now threatens to upend and unravel that careful and delicate balance.

When writing the tax code in 1954 to establish guardrails around organizational tax exemption, Congress included the Johnson Amendment without any extended discussion or debate. It was noncontroversial and widely supported precisely because it established reasonable boundaries between partisan politics and tax-exempt religious exercise. Under the Johnson Amendment, houses of worship are protected from government interference by securing tax exemptions while taxpayers are protected from being compelled to subsidize religious institutions’ political speech. It is therefore deeply troubling that the IRS, in supporting the flawed arguments made by the plaintiffs in this case, accepts the false opposition that the religious Right has tried to create between the First Amendment’s Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses.

The Religious Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses are equally essential and they stand best when they stand together. The American Founders were rebelling against centuries of established churches, religious warfare, Crusades, inquisitions, witch trials, and other manifestations of religious authoritarianism. They sought to break from theocratic rule and the imposition of religious orthodoxy on free citizens. The Constitution’s Framers brilliantly perceived that the greatest threat to religious freedom and freedom of conscience was theocracy and one religious group deploying state power to persecute and oppress others.

The core argument of the IRS’s Joint Motion for a Consent Agreement (Joint Motion) is that discussions conducted by houses of worship with their congregations about electoral campaign politics constitute nothing more than “a family discussion concerning candidates.” According to the Joint Motion, faith leaders endorsing political candidates from their tax-exempt pulpit are engaging in a “family discussion” because this discussion doesn’t “participate” nor “intervene” in a political campaign. The evidence that the IRS offers in support of this baffling claim are two definitions from Merriam Webster’s 2025 edition. Casting aside over 70 years of
legal precedent thus turns on nothing more than the magic trick of picking a preferred dictionary and ascribing choice definitions to a few well-chosen verbs.

The Joint Motion further contends that the Johnson Amendment is unenforceable in this case because, under the IRS’s own admission, the agency has not enforced the statute prior to the complaint. This argument is extraordinary. The IRS, as part of the Executive Branch, is bound by Article II to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. In this case, the IRS must enforce the Johnson Amendment as passed by Congress until Congress votes to amend or nullify the statute. This amazing argument asks the courts to give the plaintiffs in this case a free pass to violate the Johnson Amendment because no one has dared to violate it before or because the IRS had other enforcement priorities. This argument blows the door wide open for other religious organizations — or for that matter, secular nonprofits — to petition the courts for their own free pass to engage in tax-exempt partisan political speech.

Congress passed the Johnson Amendment to protect religious institutions from government interference and the taxpayers from having to subsidize partisan political speech by religious actors. Houses of worship are not subject to the same transparency and accountability requirements as other 501(c)(3) organizations. Houses of worship are granted automatic tax exempt status, and unlike other 501(c)(3)s do not have to apply for tax-exempt status (file Form 1023) or file annual returns (Form 990 series). These institutions are also rarely audited. Allowing houses of worship to wade into politics not only erodes the separation of church and
state but also opens the door to other even more sweeping potential abuses of their tax-exempt status. Without meaningful transparency or regulatory oversight, churches could become conduits for undisclosed political spending, influence campaigns, and partisan slate Endorsements — all while enjoying the benefits of taxpayer subsidies.

The IRS cannot unilaterally reinterpret the Johnson Amendment and cast aside 70 years of settled law. We urge the IRS to reconsider its Joint Motion without further delay. We also request a written response within 30 days addressing the following:

1. Explain the decision-making process behind the IRS’s departure from its longstanding enforcement of a binding federal statute. What novel legal and factual interpretations undergird this decision?

2. Please describe any actions the IRS has taken or plans to take to remedy its failure to enforce the Johnson Amendment in accordance with longstanding legal interpretations and statutory requirements.

We appreciate your attention to this matter.

Solo vehicle crash results in fatality Sunday evening

Details
Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Published: 21 July 2025

LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — A solo-vehicle wreck in south Lake County on Sunday evening became the second to claim a life over the weekend.

The crash in the 19000 block of Big Canyon Road at Harbin Springs Road near Middletown was first reported just before 7 p.m. Sunday, according to radio and California Highway Patrol online reports.

The first fire units on scene found a red pickup on its side, blocking all of Big Canyon Road.

A firefighter arriving at the scene asked Cal Fire dispatch to send an air ambulance, as one person was trapped under the bed of the truck and a second person was sitting outside of the vehicle.

Shortly after 7:15 p.m., units at the scene confirmed that one person had died and a coroner was dispatched.

Later on Sunday, the CHP reported that the vehicle had been towed and booked into evidence.

The CHP’s online reports said the driver had suffered minor injuries, including lacerations to their face and back. 

The Sunday night crash followed a solo-vehicle crash — also involving a pickup — on Saturday afternoon on Bartlett Springs Road that killed one person. 

On Saturday night there also was another solo-vehicle crash on Bartlett Springs Road east of Walker Ridge Road that resulted in one person being flown by air ambulance to a regional trauma center.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, and on Bluesky, @erlarson.bsky.social. Find Lake County News on the following platforms: Facebook, @LakeCoNews; X, @LakeCoNews; Threads, @lakeconews, and on Bluesky, @lakeconews.bsky.social. 

Supervisors to discuss economic development plans, air quality fee hike and CEO-style government

Details
Written by: LINGZI CHEN
Published: 21 July 2025

LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — The Board of Supervisors this week will hear updates on economic development initiatives, revisit a proposed air quality management fee hike and consider a report from a governance workshop exploring a shift to a “chief executive officer” model for county government. 

The‌ ‌board will meet beginning ‌at‌ ‌9‌ ‌a.m. Tuesday, July 22, in the board chambers on the first floor of the Lake County Courthouse, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport.

The‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌can‌ ‌be‌ ‌watched‌ ‌live‌ ‌on‌ ‌Channel‌ ‌8, ‌online‌ ‌at‌ ‌https://countyoflake.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx‌‌ and‌ ‌on‌ ‌the‌ ‌county’s‌ ‌Facebook‌ ‌page. ‌Accompanying‌ ‌board‌ ‌documents, ‌the‌ ‌agenda‌ ‌and‌ ‌archived‌ ‌board‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌videos‌ ‌also‌ ‌are‌ ‌available‌ ‌at‌ ‌that‌ ‌link. ‌ ‌

To‌ ‌participate‌ ‌in‌ ‌real-time, ‌join‌ ‌the‌ ‌Zoom‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌by‌ ‌clicking‌ ‌this‌ ‌link‌. ‌ ‌

The‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌ID‌ ‌is‌ 865 3354 4962, ‌pass code 726865.‌ ‌The meeting also can be accessed via one tap mobile at +16694449171,,86533544962#,,,,*726865#. The meeting can also be accessed via phone at 669 900 6833.

At 10 a.m., the board will discuss the Health Services Department’s request regarding whether it should scale back its involvement in addressing the issue of cyanobacteria in Clear Lake, since other external agencies are now handling much of the testing and monitoring more efficiently.

According to the staff memo, the department has been organizing a multi-agency task force since before COVID where there was limited understanding of the bacteria and the toxins. The task force has involved water services providers and local tribes. 

At 11:15 a.m., the board will review a report from consulting firm Municipal Resource Group on a governance and organizational workshop attended by the board and staff in March in which they discussed the possibility of moving from a chief administrative officer to a chief executive officer model. 

At 1 p.m., the board will hear an update on the county’s ongoing economic development initiatives and new legislation that may have a significant local economic impact.

These initiatives include the county’s Capital Improvement Plan, microgrid request for quote, health education and regional training hub federal funding and the upcoming application for the Community Development Block Grant. 

In the untimed items, the board will continue the conversation on the Lake County Air Quality Management District’s draft replacement fee schedule.

Last week, the agency proposed a significant fee increase, phased in over three years, with a 35% increment for the first year. Supervisors pushed back and asked for a longer rollout.

The district this week brings back to the board a four-year and five-year implementation plan for consideration.

The board will also be asked to grant the appeal of the permit revocation for a commercial outdoor cannabis cultivation of up to 110,000 square feet located at Lake Pillsbury, operated by Pillsbury Family Farms. 

In March, the Community Development Department recommended revoking the project’s major use permit, citing prior violations and failure in background checks of the company’s chief financial officer. 

The farm appealed the case in front of the board at the June 17 meeting. Now staff comes back with updated findings and a recommendation to approve of the appeal with the condition of clearing a “live scan” background check by the Lake County Sheriff’s Office. 

The full agenda follows. 

CONSENT AGENDA

5.1: Adopt resolution approving Cooperative Agreement #25-0191-000-SA with the State of California, Department of Food and Agriculture for State Organic Inspection Program for the County of Lake for the period July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026.

5.2: Adopt resolution approving Amended Agreement No. 25-0002-011-SF with the State of California, Department of Food and Agriculture for the Insect Trapping Program in the amount of $35,460.00 for FY 2025-26.

5.3: Adopt resolution amending Resolution No. 2025-76 establishing position allocations for Fiscal Year 2025-26, Budget Unit No. 1903 Department of Public Works.

5.4: Adopt a proclamation designating the week of July 20–26, 2025, as Probation Services Week in Lake County.

5.5: Approve second amendment to the contract between County of Lake and Redwood Toxicology Laboratory, Inc. for drug and alcohol testing, in the amount of $35,000.00 from July 1, 2023, to June 30, 2024, and $50,000.00 per fiscal year from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2026, and authorize the chair to sign.

5.6: (Sitting as the Board of Directors for the Lake County Watershed Protection District) Review and approve “Just Compensation” estimates for the purchase of properties within the Middle Creek Flood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project and authorize the chair of the Board of Directors to sign the approval.

5.7: Approve travel to exceed the 1500-mile maximum for Water Resources staff member Taylor Woodruff to San Antonio, Texas from August 9, 2025, to August 14, 2025, for the 155th Annual American Fisheries Society Meeting.

TIMED ITEMS

6.1, 9:02 a.m.: Public input.

6.2, 9:03 a.m.: Pet of the Week.

6.3, 9:07 a.m.: Presentation of proclamation designating the week of July 20–26, 2025, as Probation Services Week in Lake County.

6.4, 9:20 a.m.: Consideration of a letter of commitment for the “Enhancing Wildfire Prevention through Targeted Defensible Space and Fuels Reduction Projects in Lake County’s High-Risk Clearlake and North Shore Neighborhoods” project of the Lake County Resource Conservation District – CAL FIRE Wildfire Prevention Grant (#78873218).

6.5, 9:30 a.m.: Consideration of presentation on Phases One and Two of the Climate Health Adaptation and Resilience Mobilization (CHARM) Lake County Program.

6.6, 10 a.m.: Consideration of recommendation from Health Services Department regarding participation in the Clear Lake Cyanobacteria Task Force.

6.7, 10:30 a.m.: Consideration of an update on N. Lakeport FLASHES projects.

6.8, 11:15 a.m.: Consideration of a report from Municipal Resource Group on your Board’s March 21, 2025, training workshop on general governance, priority development, and organizational effectiveness.

6.9, 1 p.m.: Consideration of county economic development and housing initiatives.

NON-TIMED ITEMS

7.1: Supervisors’ weekly calendar, travel, and reports.

7.2: Sitting as the Lake County Air Quality Management District Board of Directors, continued discussion of the draft replacement fee schedule (Rules 660–668).

7.3: Consideration of proposed findings of fact and decision in the appeal of John Evans / Pillsbury Family Farms, Inc. (AB-PL-25-85).

7.4: Consideration of (a) designating one member of the Lake County Board of Supervisors to serve as a member of the AAA Governing Board, and another supervisor to serve as the alternate; and (b) appointing Amy Schimansky, Deputy Director of Social Services, as the second member representing Lake County on the AAA Governing Board.

7.5: Consideration of (a) waiving the formal bidding process pursuant to County Ordinance 3137 Section 2-38, Subsection 38.1, extension of annual agreements; and (b) approving contract between County of Lake and The Regents of the University of California for training services, in the amount of $339,915.00 from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2026, and authorize the chair to sign.

CLOSED SESSION

8.1, 1:30 p.m.: Closed session: Employee grievance complaint pursuant to Gov. Code sec. 54957.

8.2: Conference with legal counsel: Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1): McSorley v. Lake County.

Email staff reporter Lingzi Chen at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. 

  1. How the ‘big, beautiful bill’ will deepen the racial wealth gap – a law scholar explains how it reduces poor families’ ability to afford food and health care
  2. An aging nation: U.S. median age surpassed 39 in 2024
  3. Fatality reported in crash near Bartlett Springs
  • 219
  • 220
  • 221
  • 222
  • 223
  • 224
  • 225
  • 226
  • 227
  • 228
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page