When the state Assembly passed Assemblyman Rob Bonta’s bill that would have repealed state provisions that make membership in the Communist Party a fireable offense for state employment, a firestorm of criticism ensued.

The backlash forced Bonta to withdraw the bill, but any rejoicing should be tempered by the knowledge that California’s new curriculum guidelines whitewash communism’s gruesome history.

While Bonta’s backdown is a tactical victory for the victims of communism, the history and social studies curriculum frameworks approved last year by the state Board of Education could ensure a long-term strategic defeat for communism’s opponents.

In describing the Cold War, the 11th-grade curriculum framework says that the Soviet Union was a communist nation “that had a very poor record of protecting human rights.” This is a spectacular understatement. Through politically motivated forced starvations, mass executions and other heinous means, the Soviet Union was responsible for the deaths of 20 million people. The Soviet Union did not just fail to protect human rights, but rather was a killing machine of gargantuan proportions.

It gets worse, however.

In discussing the policies of Mao Zedong, longtime ruler of communist China, the framework says, “The Great Leap Forward (1958-1961) and the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) caused massive turmoil in China.” Students, therefore, “should learn about the unrest and disorder in China during these years: elites were made to work on farms; there was arbitrary application of revolutionary justice; the Red Guard even turned on members of Mao’s own party.”

Terms such as “massive turmoil,” “unrest” and “disorder” are euphemisms of appalling dimensions here. According to “The Black Book of Communism,” up to 3 million Chinese were killed during Mao’s Cultural Revolution.

Worse, 20 million to 43 million Chinese people died in the massive famine caused by Mao’s forced communist agricultural policies during The Great Leap Forward, making it the worst famine in history.

Among the atrocities committed, “The Black Book” notes that children were killed, boiled and used for fertilizer, while in various provinces children were eaten.

The death toll of communism worldwide during the 20th century is estimated to be between 85 million to 100 million. The failure of the 11th-grade framework to mention that crucial basic fact is an epic whitewash.

What children are taught or not taught in the classroom has an impact on their beliefs.

A recent YouGov survey found that, of those who have heard of him, one out of four millennials have a favorable opinion of Vladimir Lenin. A larger proportion of millennials believe that more people were killed by George W. Bush’s administration than by Joseph Stalin.

This year marks the 100th anniversary of the communist revolution in Russia. Instead of learning about the mind-boggling toll of lives lost to communism, our children are receiving a sanitized version of communism’s evil history. In an interview, a member of the Southern California Young Communist League prophetically said, “Whoever controls the minds of the next generation basically controls the future.”

Lance Izumi is Koret senior fellow in education studies and senior director of the Center for Education at the Pacific Research Institute. He is the author of the forthcoming book “The Corrupt Classroom: Bias, Indoctrination, Violence, Social Engineering and Why America Needs School Choice.”

Cuts in federal spending typically draw indignation from those affected, and President Trump’s recent education budget proposal was certainly no exception. The teachers unions, especially, were loud, derisive and hyperbolic in their responses. American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten claimed the cuts were “manifestly cruel to children and catastrophic to public schools.” National Education Association President Lily Eskelsen García blamed Betsy DeVos, claiming that the secretary of Education’s goal is to “slash funding for public schools, using voucher schemes to funnel taxpayer dollars to unaccountable private schools.”

But the reality does not warrant the union leaders’ responses. The budget cuts — which have to still run through the congressional gamut before becoming law — are hardly worth the vitriol.

In a nutshell, the budget eliminates funding for programs “that have achieved their original purpose, duplicate other programs, are narrowly focused, or are unable to demonstrate effectiveness.” Alaska Native Education, Native Hawaiian Education and 21st Century Community Learning Centers are among those on the chopping block.

All in all, the proposed budget will pare federal spending by $9 billion, which represents a 13 percent cut. Is a 13 percent cut worth the outcry? Hardly.

First of all, 92 percent of education spending comes from state and local sources, while federal dollars account for just 8 percent. Reducing that 8 percent by 13 percent means that each state will be losing about 1 percent of its total education funding. That’s it. Hardly a slash. And of course any state that loses federal dollars (Alaska and Hawaii take note) is perfectly capable of restoring funding via the legislative process.

As for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers, they are typical of bureaucratic waste. As Brookings Institution’s Mark Dynarski writes, “To date, more than $12 billion of federal tax money has been spent on a program that a preponderance of evidence indicates doesn’t help students.”

It’s also instructive to look at the bigger picture and examine the effect that spending has on student achievement. And it has been proven time and again that there really is no correlation. Between 1970 and 2012, our education spending tripled (correcting for inflation) and student achievement was flat. On the 2015 PISA test, which measures math, reading and science for 15-year-olds in 72 countries, the U.S. was in the middle of the pack — average in science and reading, but below average in math, trailing Estonia, Poland, Finland et al, while considerably outspending those countries. Additionally, a stunning 60 percent of all U.S. students now entering college need remediation.

The other budget issue for the naysayers is the inclusion of $1.4 billion targeted to “support new investments in public and private school choice.” Most of this money would be used to increase the part of the existing Title 1 program that provides money to school districts “that agree to adopt weighted student funding combined with open enrollment systems that allow federal, state and local funds to follow students to the public school of their choice.”

President Trump recently told Congress, “We need to return decisions regarding education back to the state and local levels, while advancing opportunities for parents and students to choose, from all available options, the school that best fits their needs to learn and succeed.”

Trump is right on target here. Education should not be controlled by a federal bureaucracy. As Pacific Research Institute scholar Lance Izumi told me, “Rising federal education spending and intrusion into education policymaking have done little to improve the achievement of our children, while making it even more difficult for parents to control the education their children receive. The Trump education budget emphasizes that Washington is not the answer to our education woes, but, rather, that local control, and especially empowering parents to make the best education choices for their children, is the best hope for our young people and for America.”

Only those with a special interest in maintaining the failing status quo could disagree.

Larry Sand, a retired teacher, is president of the California Teachers Empowerment Network.

State political conventions are usually orgies of booze, food and good cheer, where steaks are eaten, scotch is sipped, backs are slapped, election outcomes are predetermined and very little actual work is done.

On rare occasions an actual battle pops up over the platform or a highly coveted party endorsement, which can result in delegates getting testy with one another, but the California Democratic Party convention last month in Sacramento flew completely off the rails. Things went bonkers — and the repercussions are still being felt.

Much of the reporting during the convention focused on the multiple profanity-laced outbursts from the dais, directed at President Donald Trump, the assembled protesters and anyone else on the outs with former CDP Chairman John Burton.

But after the convention closed, news coverage has centered around the accusation that California Democrat and “Berniecrat” favorite Kimberly Ellis was cheated out of the chairmanship by longtime party operative and Hillary Clinton supporter Eric Bauman in the state party’s race for chair.

Ellis’ team attributed her 62-vote loss to widespread voter fraud and concluded in a public statement that “the wrong individual is serving as chair.”

Mike Roth, incoming spokesman for the state Democratic Party, responded by saying that Ellis is providing “unsubstantiated allegations” and “no facts.”

This dispute is still being sorted out.

These two competing narratives will have an impact long after the steaks are digested — “Berniecrat”-style Democratic socialists represent almost half of the party’s delegates and support Senate Bill 562, which would establish a state-run health care system that covers all 40 million Californians — including millions of undocumented immigrants. This issue is now a litmus test issue for Democratic candidates running for office.

RoseAnn DeMoro, executive director of the California Nurses Association, told hundreds of activists outside the Capitol that they would put up primary election challengers against legislators if they voted against universal health care.

“They cannot be in denial anymore that this is a movement that can primary them,” DeMoro insisted.

In response, the crowd roared, “Vote them out!” In a direct reference to hesitant Democratic lawmakers.

As you would expect, when SB562 came up before the California Senate, it sailed through on a 23-14, largely party-line vote.  Only one Democrat, Steve Glazer, D-Orlinda, voted against it, with three other Democrats abstaining.

If you’re not familiar with the details of SB562, then you have something in common with the legislators who voted for it, because it didn’t include any source of funding.

But who has time for counting when there’s cursing from the podium to do!?

According to estimates from a legislative analysis provided to the Senate Appropriations Committee on May 22, the proposal is expected to cost $400 billion per year, more than double the state budget. While half of it could be taken care of by existing taxes, $200 billion would have to be covered by new tax revenues.

Oh, and if you like your health care plan, be prepared to kiss it goodbye, because in addition to breaking the budget this bill would replace all private and public insurance policies, including Medicare.

California Gov. Jerry Brown hasn’t indicated what he plans on doing should this bill pass the Assembly and end up on his desk, but he is termed out of office and doesn’t have to worry about being “primaried,” so he can do whatever he wants.

All indications are that he wants the bullet train to be the focus of his legacy rather than being known as the governor who bankrupted the state chasing health care pipe dreams.

California will soon have a new governor, and 2018 front-runner and current Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom issued a joint public statement last July with DeMoro endorsing “Medicare for All” in the party platform.

Oh, and the author of the bill, Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, is the front-runner in the race for California insurance commissioner.

If California Democrats hate the Russians as much as they claim, could they please stop governing like them?

John Phillips is a CNN political commentator and can be heard weekdays at 3 p.m. on “The Drive Home with Jillian Barberie and John Phillips” on KABC/AM 790.

As California moves toward implementation of the legalization of recreational marijuana use, there are a lot of rules and regulations to draw up, on both the state and local levels.

One of those needed regulations is moving through the Legislature now in the form of Assembly Bill 238, by local Assemblyman Marc Steinorth, R-Rancho Cucamonga.

Steinorth’s bill would ban highly combustible cannabis extractors used in concentrated THC production from being used in residential neighborhoods.

“A recent explosion in San Bernardino County highlights the danger of these marijuana processing labs often located in residential areas,” Steinorth said in a statement. “Butane is dangerous and highly combustible. As California comes to terms with recreational cannabis, we should continue to protect public safety and keep explosive equipment out of our neighborhoods.”

He was referring to a May 3 garage fire in Hesperia that investigators attributed to the explosion of a THC extraction lab in the garage. A man, suspected of using the lab to make “honey oil,” was seriously injured in the explosion and fire. The house sits next to a middle school.

Volatile-solvent cannabis extractors, using combustible gases like butane, have caused many accidental explosions.

Proposition 64, passed by state voters in November to legalize and regulate recreational marijuana, creates a “Manufacturing Level 2” license for “sites that manufacture marijuana products using volatile solvents.”

AB238 would prohibit a Manufacturing Level 2 licensee from manufacturing cannabis products while using volatile solvents in a residential structure or on residential property — in other words, in a neighborhood.

“As the cannabis industry transitions into an above-ground economy, it is important that cannabis businesses do not operate potentially dangerous equipment in populated neighborhoods and instead properly use commercial property,” Steinorth wrote in an Assembly analysis of his legislation.

Steinorth’s bill passed the Assembly on a 68-0 vote last week. It should speed through the state Senate and be signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown.

For some people, Google is a little too good at what it does. What it does is read every pixel of digitized information on public websites stored on servers around the globe, and then deliver an organized and easily accessible page of links to it in response to any question that’s typed into the plain white text box at Google.com.

It’s free, fast and probably the greatest risk to privacy since the invention of windows. Glass windows, not the software kind.

Now the New York state Legislature is considering a new law, Assembly Bill 5323, that would create a “right to be forgotten” on the internet. It would require search engines, indexers, publishers and any other entity that makes information available online to remove “inaccurate,” “irrelevant,” “inadequate” or “excessive” information about an individual, if that individual so requests, within 30 days or face a penalty of $250 per day plus attorney fees.

The “right to be forgotten” has been the law in the European Union since 2014. Google says it has received more than 700,000 requests covering the removal of approximately 2 million links, and has taken down 43 percent of them. The company must evaluate each request individually, weighing the public’s right to public information against the requester’s right to, or wish for, privacy.

Saying “no” can lead to extended legal wrangling. The EU’s highest court is set to review the case of four individuals in France who unsuccessfully sought the delisting of links to “sensitive” information about them, including details of criminal convictions.

In February, Japan’s highest court ruled unanimously against an individual who wanted to be “forgotten.” Justice Kiyoko Okabe said the delisting of information “can be allowed only when the value of privacy protection significantly outweighs that of information disclosure.”

That illustrates the problem: The law is unknowable because it’s a judgment call every time. Google had a policy of refusing requests to take down information about criminal records, but in May an appellate court in the Netherlands ordered the company to remove links to details about an attorney’s 2012 conviction on weapons charges.

In the U.S., where freedom of speech and the press are written in plain language in the Constitution but the right to privacy is not, laws like the one under consideration in New York are likely unconstitutional.

But these laws are misguided, regardless. Taking down links to public information is not the same as sealing a record. The information is still available. It’s just not easy or free to obtain.

Companies that sell data will still be able to collect and disseminate information on individuals and businesses, including derogatory information, for customers who can pay for it. Ordinary people and small businesses will be at a disadvantage.

And while Google has the resources to fight it out in courts around the globe, most website publishers are far less able to bear the risk of financial liability and endless attorney fees. “Right to be forgotten” laws have the potential to turn the internet into a vacant lot.

It’s understandable that people and businesses would like to keep embarrassing information or bad reviews out of the public’s sight. But laws requiring companies like Google to redact-on-demand are a mistake. Individuals who seek truthful public information when making decisions for themselves and their families should not be deprived of free and convenient access to all the facts.

For resort, Mary Alice Haney was inspired by the Seventies era, cool vibe of the leading ladies in Warren Beatty’s film “Shampoo.” The reference is undeniable in her look book and infused the whole collection of cocktail garments, Haney’s “bread and butter.” Highlights included a textured little black dress with raffia and sequins, and a shimmery, light pink slipdress that revealed a pop of hot pink on the reverse as the model walked.
“With Haney, it’s the sexiness but focusing on one area. It’s not an overkill of sexiness,” the designer explained. Cocktail dresses and separates adhered to this theory with the appropriate amount of revealing cuts and slits. A bold red “pajama-inspired” silk and lace slipdress hit the mark with just the right amount of suggestive — and coolness. Resort was also the first season for Haney to introduce a caftan, which is specially tailored to the body’s curves and will be offered to customers in customizable colors.
See More From the 2018 Resort Collections:
 
Mara Hoffman Resort 2018: “The goal was small but impactful,” explained Mara Hoffman of her newest, one delivery, refined resort 2018 collection.

 
 Trina Turk Resort 2018: “We tried something new this year,” explained the designer of her resort line, “we split the collection into two mini capsules.”
 

Prabal Gurung Resort 2018: The works of

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.Read More…

At Mantu, seaside references gave the collection a serene tone. For starters, the sophisticated palette of different shades of blue, crispy whites and sand tones went nicely with the easy, effortless silhouettes. A great fluid trench, for example, featured a pleated back, while white men’s wear-inspired shirts were generously cut and, in some instances, featured open backs or floral embroideries — reinforcing the collection’s constant attempt to balance feminine and masculine elements. Other highlights included great silky polka dot pajama ensembles and a mid-length dress. On the more summery side of the spectrum, great linen shirtdresses and voluminous ample tunics stood out.
See More From the 2018 Resort Collections:
Mara Hoffman Resort 2018: “The goal was small but impactful,” explained Mara Hoffman of her newest, one delivery, refined resort 2018 collection.
 Trina Turk Resort 2018: “We tried something new this year,” explained the designer of her resort line, “we split the collection into two mini capsules.”
Prabal Gurung Resort 2018: The works of London-based Moroccan photographer Hassan Hajjaj informed Prabal Gurung’s resort collection.
Agnona Resort 2018: Late Nineties minimalistic references and sportswear influences were combined with the brand’s signature luxurious fabrics and sophisticated details into an effortless, chic collection.
Lilly Pulitzer Resort 2018: Lilly Pulitzer is known for having resortwear

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.Read More…

Thom Browne’s women’s collection was born directly out of his men’s line. The two are always connected, but some seasons it’s more obvious than others. Resort was one of those occasions. “For me, pre-collections are about taking advantage of what people are getting to know me for, and that’s specifically tailoring,” said Browne, presenting his collection in his newly christened stand-alone women’s store on Hudson Street in New York. To say some of the looks borrowed from the boys would be understating it. A gray blazer over a white shirt dress worn with a gray tie was pretty literal. Ditto a khaki trench over a gray suit with Browne’s famous cropped pants. His classic tailoring makes a strong unisex look.
Where he more obviously feminized, things got more fun as he introduced color, kitsch and incredible fabrications — all house signatures in addition to tailoring. There were fabulous tweeds — ultra light with colorful bits of denim and fur worked in — on jackets, skirts and coats. Browne tweaked Japanese school uniforms in bright madras and madcap layers, and played with preppy lawn sport motifs. A graphic lace, delicate pearl embroidery on a salt-washed cotton blazer, and gold threadwork on a

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.Read More…