Riva’s Corsaro 100 made its European debut at the Monaco Grand Prix, serving as Scuderia Ferrari’s unofficial residence.

The Good American designer, with co-founder Emma Grede, on what to expect from Season 3 of the collection.

The author and activist was honored alongside Cecile Richards and Janelle Monáe at last night’s CFDA awards.

New shopping site Olivela helps you “nudge the world a little bit” every time you click to buy.

Re: “How the Paris climate deal pullout could hurt the U.S.” [Opinion, June 4]: The United States did not “abdicate … its world leadership” on climate change when President Trump signed an order to begin pulling out of the Paris agreement entered into by President Obama last year. Real leaders lead by actions, not talk.

An MIT study concluded in 2015 that if every nation performs its unenforceable promises under the Paris agreement, the effect on climate by 2100 would be negligible, at best a reduction of 0.2 degrees Celsius. President Obama has not denied this, but he argues that Paris shows “leadership” toward encouraging the Paris signatories to improve upon their promises. The history of the United Nations and League of Nations shows that this sort of talk, talk, talk never gets us anywhere. Before it entered the Paris agreement, the United States had already performed better than any other nation in reducing greenhouse gases because of a shift to natural gas.

This shift occurred not through heavy government regulation, but through free-market innovation, slant drilling and fracking, which also increased jobs.

Anyone interested in climate change must begin by persuading the chief polluters — China, Pakistan and India — to change. The Paris agreement was not “leading” them there. But American leadership, through its free-market example, opens possibilities.

Those who can’t sleep at night out of concern about the prospect of catastrophic climate change should be ecstatic about this kind of leadership, which is all about action, not talk.

— Robert Loewen, Laguna Beach

America’s CO2 reduction

In the last 10 years, since the advent of horizontal drilling and fracking, the U.S. has become the world’s leading producer of natural gas. In this short time, the generation of electricity using coal has dropped by about 20 percent. This major switch has resulted in the U.S. reducing its carbon footprint more than any other country in the world, and this without the Paris climate accord, which purposefully was not ratified by, or even presented to, our Senate. The United States will continue to lead the world in cleaner energy technology. However, I find the environmentalists hypocritical when they won’t concede to the use of zero-carbon emissions from nuclear power. Today’s nuclear technology is far advanced from when San Onofre was designed.

— Bill Ring, Mission Viejo

Just in case anyone wonders what the real issue was in the very close race between Eric Bauman and Kimberly Ellis over who would become the next chairperson of the California Democratic Party, it was money.

No, not salary or other personal emoluments, although Bauman — the party’s longtime Los Angeles County leader — has received his share of payments from ballot initiative campaigns. This was really about who would control the purse strings of the nation’s most successful state party and thus decide who gets its many millions of laundered dollars in each election cycle.

It’s all because the year-2000 Proposition 34 made party heads in California the state’s most powerful unpublicized political kingmakers, allowing huge contributions to party committees which then parcel funds out where they like. It’s a way for donors to circumvent campaign donation limits with identities partially concealed. This is money laundering, plain, simple and also legal.

The current dicey system is now sure to continue at least another two years, too, as state legislators (about two-thirds of them Democrats) the other day killed a bill making gifts to political parties subject to the same limits imposed on donations to candidates.

In 2014, for example, the state Democratic Party passed out $10.4 million, while also influencing where the party’s many county central committees funneled their millions. Republicans, meanwhile, doled out just a little more than half as much as Democrats, as billionaires, big unions and big business donors realize the GOP has little chance to retake control of state government anytime soon.

The biggest recipients of party money that year included Democrat Luis Chavez, ranked No. 1 with $2.35 million in party money, who lost a tight Hanford/Fresno-area state Senate race to Republican Andy Vidak, the No. 5-ranked recipient of party money with $2.1 million. Over the years, the bigger-money recipients in close races have usually won.

Yes, ideology also had a lot to do with the extremely close Bauman-Ellis contest, where establishment candidate Bauman eked out a 60-vote win over Richmond political organizer Ellis. (It’s sign of California’s times that Bauman, an openly gay man favoring gun controls, easy access to abortions and strong environmental protections, was considered the more conservative candidate.)

This was essentially a re-run of last year’s Hillary Clinton-Bernard Sanders primary election contest, where the liberal feminist Clinton was not liberal enough for many Democrats. Ellis, a Sanders supporter, benefited from that faction’s strong turnouts at district meetings where many party convention delegates are chosen. Weeks after the state party convention, she still had not conceded the outcome of the convention vote.

Bauman’s apparent win probably will see many more moderate Democrats get party backing and money than if Ellis had won. It means Sanders backers will at least have to bide their time before making another try at taking over the state party and being able to funnel party cash to ultra-liberals.

But the Legislature’s refusal to clean up the current system is what really cries out for change. On the Republican side, for example, billionaire Charles Munger in 2014 gave $3.3 million to the party, with the ability to request privately where it would end up. This means there is no public record of who benefited from his largesse, while there would be if he’d given directly to candidates. Essentially, Munger and other big donors like the Service Employees International Union ($2.3 million), California Teachers Association ($676,000), Philip Morris USA and affiliates ($650,000) and PG&E Corp. ($526,000) can give to whoever they like without anyone holding the eventual winners’ feet to the fire over where they’re getting their funds and whether they later vote to benefit their benefactors.

Among last year’s biggest donors were Indian casinos, utilities and health care companies, each interest having a huge stake in the makeup of the Legislature. As in 2014, there was no public accounting last year of where their money went.

This disgraceful system is a major legacy of former Democratic Gov. Gray Davis, recalled in 2003 partly because of his own political fund-raising practices. Since Prop. 34 passed, one tally shows, the state Democratic Party has spent fully $401 million on candidates and campaigns.

With that kind of money and commensurate influence at stake, it’s no wonder this spring’s contest to head that party was so hotly contested.

Thomas D. Elias is a writer in Southern California.
tdelias@aol.com

The California Senate passed a bill last week that would make this the only state to provide health care to all residents through what’s called the single-payer system.

Is “single payer” the best health insurance solution?

That’s our Question of the Week for readers.

Would the plan outlined in Senate Bill 562, introduced by Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, and Sen. Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, be better for Californians than the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), than congressional Republicans’ proposal to replace it, and than systems with less government involvement?

Is enough known to allow you to give thumbs up or down to the plan, which would need a funding scheme to be developed by the Assembly before a vote could be taken in that house?

Do the potential benefits touted by the proponents outweigh the likely costs highlighted by opponents?

Under a single-payer system, insurance companies would be replaced by government-funded health care, with doctors and hospitals paid by the state.

The bill’s Democratic authors say this simplified system would insure more people, would eliminate out-of-pocket expenses for patients, and would reduce costs by boosting the government’s power to bargain for lower rates with drug and medical-care providers.

But critics say the plan would require enormous tax increases and would be a government-run mess.

Analysts put the price tag at $400 billion a year. That’s more than twice the total state budget. While the cost could be paid partly from existing Medicaid and Medi-Cal funds, it appears at least $100 billion in new taxes would be needed.

Even if a single-payer plan is approved by the Assembly and Gov. Jerry Brown, it couldn’t be enacted unless voters approved a change in the state spending cap.

If you could vote on “single payer,” would you say yes or no?

Email your thoughts to letters@ocregister.com. Please include your full name and city or community of residence. Provide a daytime phone number. Or, if you prefer, share your views in the comments section that accompanies this article online.

We’ll publish as many responses as possible.

BUENA PARK — A person called in a bomb threat at a Target store Monday night, causing the store to be evacuated for 30 minutes, authorities said.

Buena Park Police received a call about 6:25 p.m. on Monday, June 5, from a Target employee at the Beach Boulevard and Orangethorpe Avenue location, saying that they had just received a call saying there was a bomb inside the store, Lt. Brad Geyer said.

At about 6:35 p.m. store security and the police department cleared the store of customers and employees while officers searched for a bomb, Geyer said. The number of people inside the store at the time was unknown.

Officers did a complete search of the store and nothing was found, Geyer said.

The store was re-opened by 7 p.m.

An investigation into the incident is still ongoing.