President Donald Trump is under fire in Northern California not for the usual reasons – that Trump loathing is so intense in the region that many liberals think Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s saying Trump might someday turn out to be a good president is a

Last week, Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, and Rep. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, blasted the White House for omitting Northern California fire victims from a request for Congress to appropriate $44 billion for disaster relief. Thompson told the San Francisco Chronicle that the Trump administration was “playing political games.”

This week, the White House fired back. White House spokeswoman Helen Ferre said the administration is “fully committed to assisting the victims of the California wildfires in their hour of need,” according to a report from the Chronicle’s Washington bureau.

Ferre said the fine print on the $44 billion request showed that Golden State wildfire victims could expect to get part of $23.5 billion requested for the Disaster Relief Fund, which is overseen by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Unlikely political couple: California Dems, Texas Republicans

But Ferre’s comments were unable to calm a larger furor over the administration’s disaster-relief request – one in which Texas Republicans and California Democrats made for a most unusual political couple, with both upset over what they see as a White House unable to grasp their needs.

Texas has sought $61 billion to help the Houston region recover from Hurricane Harvey – more than eight times the $7.4 billion that Gov. Jerry Brown sought for California wildfire relief. With damages from Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico expected to be bigger than Texas’ and California’s requests combined, there’s fear that the Trump administration will balk at the federal government footing huge bills in the wake of disasters.

Texas newspapers have had days of headlines in which Republican Gov. Greg Abbott and GOP Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn have teed off on the Trump White House. Abbott said its plan was “completely inadequate,” the Dallas Morning News reported.

But a House Republican from Southern California could end up with a big say over the size of the relief package. That’s because Congress will ultimately decide how much disaster relief is appropriated, not Trump. While the president can veto a relief package, he can’t directly shape it.

That’s why Rep. Thompson and officials from Sonoma and Santa Rosa counties have already begun lobbying Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Corona, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee, for his help.

Only one House Republican signed the governor’s letter requesting $7.4 billion in federal aid – and it was Rep. Ed Royce of Fullerton, who represents the district just west of Calvert’s.

But after a Thompson-escorted tour of a devastated area in Sonoma County, Calvert offered reassuring words, telling the Chronicle he would work to ensure all disaster areas get “the relief they need.”

By Joseph Perkins

California Reps. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, and Ken Calvert, R-Corona, ought to meet up for coffee while they’re back in the Nation’s Capital for Congress’ post-election lame duck session.

The chairs of state’s Democratic and Republican congressional delegations, respectively, should set partisan differences aside — if only for a brief, shining moment — and draw up a list of issues vitally important to their home state, on which both delegations can work together.

If Lofgren and Calvert asked me — and, for some reason, neither has returned my phone calls — I would suggest the following:

The fiscal cliff. Insist that their fellow lawmakers use the lame duck session to reach a bipartisan agreement that prevents the federal government from plunging over the dreaded cliff, otherwise more than $500 billion in federal tax increases, along with more than $100 billion in across-the-board spending cuts, will take effect this coming New Year’s Day.

If Congress fails to make a deal, no state will be more adversely affected than California, which would fall back into recession, plunging the state government into another budget crisis, as a report last week by the state Legislative Analyst’s Office warned.

“We examined one possible recession scenario,” the LAO stated, ominously, “in which state revenues were about $11 billion lower than in our forecast for 2012-13 and 2013-14 combined.”

Military funding.  Accept reductions in defense spending as the Obama administration winds down military operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan, but oppose the draconian cuts slated to take effect through automatic sequestration.

More than 10 percent of federal defense dollars are spent in California, according to a study by Bloomberg Government. That amounts to a $57 billion a year boost to the state economy.

Sharp reductions in defense outlays will be a shock to the state economy, hurting California companies that have long contracted with the Pentagon, causing more than 135,000 defense-related job losses throughout the state, according to a report by the George Mason University Center for Regional Analysis. 

Immigration Reform. Take leadership on Capital Hill in creating a pathway to earned legalization for undocumented immigrants, including the estimated 3 million here in California.

Now is a good time to do something, inasmuch as illegal immigration is down a third since President Obama was elected four years ago, with net migration from Mexico estimated at zero, according to The Wall Street Journal.

As to deterring future illegal immigration, the best way is by making it less daunting for those seeking opportunity — work, education, business — to come legally.

How about a reinvention of the Bracero program, which lasted from the early 1940s to the mid-1960s, which allowed Mexican laborers to enter the United States legally to perform temporary contract work (usually in the agricultural sector) before returning to their native country?

Electrical Grid. Urge lawmakers to take steps to modernize and expand the nation’s electrical grid. The California Independent System Operator, which manages the flow of electricity across the high-voltage, long-distance power lines that make up 80 percent of California’s power grid, depends on the national grid to deliver atoms from out of state to meet the California demand of 30 million business and residential users.

As it is, much of the nation’s grid was built more than a half-century ago. Today it is a patchwork system that ultimately will break down, warned a report by the American Society of Civil Engineers, unless $673 billion is invested in the grid between now and 2020.

That massive investment needn’t be borne entirely by taxpayers. Curt Hebert Jr., former chair of the Federal Energy Regulation Commission, says there is plenty of private capital available for investment in electrical infrastructure. That is, if the feds give them sufficient incentives to invest.