California
It’s been a year of modest victories and tough losses for California’s reparations movement. What comes next?
California is often celebrated as a leader in the growing movement for reparations for Black Americans. In 2020, it announced its first-in-the-nation reparations taskforce, which was charged with studying the issue and making recommendations for redress. Since then, it’s inspired similar initiatives across the US. But actually implementing those reparations proposals hasn’t been as easy.
Over the past year, members of California’s Legislative Black Caucus put forward a package of bills that drew on the taskforce’s policy recommendations released last June. They included initiatives to increase access to education for Black Californians, prohibit race-based discrimination in schools and workplaces, and offer restitution for mid-century racist eminent domain programs in which the homes and businesses of Black residents were seized by the state.
After final votes were taken in August, fewer than half the bills passed.
Kamilah Moore, a reparatory justice scholar and attorney who chaired the state’s reparations taskforce, spoke to the Guardian about what these mixed results mean, where the movement goes from here, and how the elections could shape the future fight for reparations. The conversation has been edited for clarity and length.
When the legislative session closed at the end of August, six of the 14 priority bills were ultimately passed and signed by the governor. What do you make of this – is this a success or a setback?
It’s a mix of both. The taskforce worked for two years to compile evidence to justify a claim for reparations. We spent a lot of time drafting our final report, and we were very intentional about our policy recommendations.
So, yes, it’s a success in the sense that the bills introduced by the Legislative Black Caucus were inspired by our final report. And the fact that half of them passed is great. It’s historic, and I want to give credit where credit is due.
At the same time, there were other bills introduced by legislators that would have provided more immediate or material change that were voted down. Some were killed earlier in the session, with legislators citing the budget deficit. Others were killed at the last minute by legislators from the Black caucus for reasons the community is still trying to figure out.
Which achievements from this legislative session feel most impactful?
One is an amendment to the California constitution to no longer allow a slavery loophole if you’re convicted for a crime. It’s going to be on the ballot on November 5 as Proposition 6, and if it passes, prisoners will no longer be able to be forced to work for slave wages. While it’s going to have a direct and almost immediate impact on all prisoners, no matter their race, it will be felt most by Black Americans, who are disproportionately represented in California state prisons and jails.
Another was the formal apology bill [which Newsom signed in September]. When most Americans think about reparations, they think about money or a check, but compensation is just one form of reparations under international law. The legal definition comprises five forms, one of which is satisfaction (the other three are restitution, rehabilitation and guarantees of non-repetition), which can relate to something like an apology.
But an official recognition of wrongdoing from the state does more than check off a box. It provides a foundation for advocates to stand on in the fight for more substantive and material reparations – like, eventually, direct cash payments or free college tuition. It means the state can’t be let off the hook.
Among those that failed, which are the biggest losses?
Some of the biggest losses to the community include Senate Bill 1331, which would have created a new account in the state treasury to fund reparations programs, policies and initiatives; SB 1403, which would have created a new state agency to provide direct services to descendants of slaves; and SB 1050, which would have given an avenue to reclaim land that was taken by the government via racially motivated eminent domain.
On the last day of the California state legislature, people thought that the Black caucus was going to introduce two of those bills – the fund bill and the agency bill – for final vote. But at the last minute, they decided not to. It was a psychic blow for us reparationists to see Black legislators fail to carry through two of the most transformative bills in state history.
The third was vetoed by Newsom after it passed through the state legislature. But the move was deceptive, as Newsom used another bill’s absence — an absence he had himself orchestrated — as justification for the veto.
It’s notable that none of the 14 bills put forth by the California Legislative Black Caucus this year included cash payments. What do you make of this?
As chair of the taskforce, I can say that we did our work. The statute stated that our final recommendations had to comport with international human rights law standards, meaning they would need to include compensation. We took that mandate very seriously.
We hired five trained economists to help us crunch the numbers to figure out what compensation could look like. We didn’t want to just come up with any number. We wanted it to be rooted in data and a solid methodology.
The final figure – $800bn – got a lot of attention. There was shell shock even among taskforce members. But we weren’t saying that the state should give $800bn to Black Americans in the state. We were saying that’s how much the state has dispossessed from African Americans in California. That’s how much the state has stolen from African Americans in California through exclusionary public policy – like housing segregation, mass incarceration, over-policing and the devaluation of Black businesses – that has hindered our opportunities to build wealth over time.
Then, the University of California, Berkeley, released a poll that found most Californians opposed direct cash payments, and that became the major headline. Speaking from the outside looking in, I think that played into the calculus of the Legislative Black Caucus. To me, it appears their strategy was to take a low-hanging-fruit approach by introducing recommendations from the taskforce report that were easy wins instead of more substantive ones, like direct cash payments and other forms of material reparations.
Do you think that California has fallen short on its promise, or has it shown that progress – even if incremental – is possible?
Data show that when the Black community thinks about reparations, there’s a hope gap. So, while most of us think there should be reparations – and will be in line if that day comes – the majority of us don’t think that day will ever come.
I think the work of the taskforce has truncated that hope gap a little bit. The apology bill has shown that this is possible. And even though other bills didn’t pass, they came very close. People can taste it.
Even with some of the legislative setbacks of this past year, the movement for reparations in the state and nationally is more invigorated than ever. Black people are seeing that this is a serious movement. They want to be involved and to see more material reparations in this next session. All across the nation, people are energized.
What are reparations advocates thinking now? What are the next steps, both in California and nationally, especially to make sure that any future reparations bills are impactful, not just symbolic?
This session, we got a lot of symbolism. The bills that passed are cool, but we’re looking for more material reparations in this next session.
First off, the community is advocating for the Black caucus to reintroduce the two bills that they killed. We’re also expecting legislators to reintroduce some bills that died in appropriations earlier this year, like one that would have given property tax relief to descendants of slaves living in formerly redlined neighborhoods, or another that would have given descendants housing grants to purchase their first home or to pay down a mortgage. Finally, we’re hoping to see new bills inspired by the taskforce’s work for things like free college tuition.
Nationally, it depends on who wins. Some organizations are pushing for President Biden to create a reparations commission via executive order before he gets out of office.
Speaking of the national stage, as a senator, Kamala Harris backed HR 40, which would have created a commission to study reparations, but this year she has largely side-stepped the issue. What do you expect from her if she’s elected?
Vice-President Kamala Harris has been asked about reparations a couple of times on the campaign trail recently, and she thinks it should be studied. So, if she wins – and if there’s a blue House and a blue Senate – I think there will be an uptick in trying to put the appropriate pressure on Congress to pass a reparations commission. But she indicated to the National Association of Black Journalists she doesn’t want to do it via executive order. It will have to go through Congress.
And if Trump wins?
Trump has already touted a Project 2025 talking point about disbanding the Department of Education. He also said he would withhold funding from schools that teach the histories of Native American genocide and of chattel slavery. But in California, we teach the truth. So, when Donald Trump says he wants to eliminate the Department of Education and withhold federal funding from localities or states that teach the things that are in our taskforce report, that is alarming. He has also criticized Kamala Harris by saying she wants to issue taxpayer-funded reparations. Piecing that together, it doesn’t look great for reparations if he becomes president.
California
Southern California’s Christmas weather forecast keeps getting worse. What you need to know
The Pineapple Express storm bearing down on Southern California could bring heavy rain and strong winds throughout Christmas week, potentially triggering mudslides, downing trees and flooding not only freeways but also homes and businesses.
If the forecasts are right, this could be one of the stormiest Christmases in recent memory for Southern California. There’s an 80% chance downtown Los Angeles will get 2 or more inches of rain from Tuesday through Christmas Day. The last time downtown got 2 or more inches of rain over Christmas Eve and Christmas Day was in 1971.
Here’s what you need to know.
Timing
The peak of the system is expected Tuesday through Thursday, according to the National Weather Service.
There’s an 80% to 100% chance of rain in Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties starting Tuesday night and lasting into Wednesday and Thursday.
Precipitation timing for Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties.
(National Weather Service)
In Orange County, the Inland Empire and San Diego County, light showers are possible Tuesday, but the heaviest rainfall is expected Wednesday, with officials warning of heavy rainfall, increased flooding risks and possible mudslides. Flood and mudslide risks will continue Thursday.
Expected effects of the storm for Orange County, the Inland Empire and San Diego County.
(National Weather Service)
Worst-case scenario
Forecasters are warning that there’s a 40% chance of “very high” amounts of rain for Los Angeles, Ventura and southern Santa Barbara counties, and a 30% chance of the same for northern Santa Barbara County and San Luis Obispo County.
That scenario would see 4 or more inches of rain fall on the coast and in the valleys, with 8 or more inches in the mountains and foothills, Tuesday through Thursday. Peak rainfall rates would be half an inch to 1 inch per hour.
According to the National Weather Service, that could cause:
• Significant mudslides
• Flooded freeways
• Streams and rivers flooding over their banks
• Localized flooding that could rise above curbs and into homes and businesses
• Moderate coastal flooding in south-facing areas
• Downed trees and power lines
• Dangerous sea conditions
• Swiftwater rescues
Rainfall probabilities for Los Angeles, Ventura and southern Santa Barbara counties.
(National Weather Service)
Between Tuesday and Thursday, numerous areas have a high chance of seeing 3 or more inches of rain. There’s a 77% chance of that occurring in Anaheim and Yorba Linda, a 74% chance in Santa Ana, a 73% chance in Ontario, a 71% chance in Mission Viejo, a 69% chance in Irvine, a 68% chance in Chino, a 65% chance in Laguna Niguel and a 60% chance in San Clemente.
Rainfall probabilities for northern Santa Barbara County and San Luis Obispo County.
(National Weather Service)
‘High amounts’ of rain scenario
There’s also a 40% chance of “high amounts” of rain in L.A., Ventura and southern Santa Barbara counties, and a 50% chance of the same in northern Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties. That scenario would entail 2 to 4 inches of rain falling along the coast and in the valleys, with 4 to 8 inches in the mountains and foothills.
Rain to that extent would risk flooding freeway lanes; causing minor coastal flooding, mudslides and debris flows; and potentially force swiftwater rescues in fast-moving rivers and streams.
Wind
There’s a potential for gusty winds from the south, said Robbie Munroe, meteorologist with the National Weather Service’s Oxnard office, which issues forecasts for L.A., Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties.
That risks toppling trees and power lines. On Tuesday night, Los Angeles could see peak gusts of 31 mph; Woodland Hills, 38 mph; Paso Robles, 52 mph; and San Luis Obispo, 53 mph.
“Avoid parking under trees,” the weather service said. “Secure loose outdoor objects.”
There’s a 65% chance of gusts exceeding 35 mph in Huntington Beach, a 60% chance in San Diego, a 45% chance in Big Bear Lake and Ramona, a 40% chance in Escondido and a 35% chance in Riverside, according to the weather service office in San Diego.
California
Immigrant truck drivers in limbo as feds deny California effort to reissue licenses
Thousands of immigrant drivers whose commercial driver’s licenses are set to expire next month were left bewildered and disappointed when news spread that California was planning on reissuing the licenses — only to learn federal regulators had not authorized doing so.
Amarjit Singh, a trucker and owner of a trucking company in the Bay Area, said he and other drivers were hopeful when word of California’s intentions reached them.
“We were happy [the California Department of Motor Vehicles] was going to reissue them,” he said. “But now, things aren’t so clear and it feels like we’re in the dark.”
Singh said he doesn’t know whether he should renew his insurance and permits that allow him to operate in different states.
“I don’t know if I’m going to have to look for another job,” he said. “I’m stuck.”
Singh is one of 17,000 drivers who were given 60-day cancellation notices on Nov. 6 following a federal audit of California’s non-domiciled commercial driver’s license program, which became a political flashpoint after an undocumented truck driver was accused of making an illegal U-turn and caused a crash in Florida that killed three people.
The nationwide program allows immigrants authorized to work in the country to obtain commercial driver’s licenses. But officials said the federal audit found that the California Department of Motor Vehicles had issued thousands of licenses with expiration dates that extended beyond the work permits, prompting federal officials to halt the program until the state was in compliance.
This week, the San Francisco Chronicle obtained a letter dated Dec. 10 from DMV Director Steve Gordon to the U.S Department of Transportation stating that the state agency had met federal guidelines and would begin reissuing the licenses.
In a statement to The Times, DMV officials confirmed that they had notified regulators and were planning to issue the licenses on Wednesday, but federal authorities told them Tuesday that they could not proceed.
DMV officials said they met with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, which oversees issuance of non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses, to seek clarification about what issues remain unresolved.
A spokesperson for the Department of Transportation, which oversees the FMCSA, would only say that it was continuing to work with the state to ensure compliance.
The DMV is hopeful the federal government will allow California to move ahead, said agency spokesperson Eva Spiegel.
“Commercial drivers are an important part of our economy — our supply chains don’t move and our communities don’t stay connected without them,” Spiegel said. “DMV stands ready to resume issuing commercial driver’s licenses, including corrected licenses to eligible drivers. Given we are in compliance with federal regulations and state law, this delay by the federal government not only hurts our trucking industry, but it also leaves eligible drivers in the cold without any resolution during this holiday season.”
Bhupinder Kaur — director of operations at UNITED SIKHS, a national human and civil rights organization — said the looming cancellations will disproportionately impact Sikh, Punjabi, Latino and other immigrant drivers who are essential to California’s freight economy.
“I’ve spoken to truckers who have delayed weddings. I’ve spoken to truckers who have closed their trucking companies. I’ve spoken to truckers who are in this weird limbo of not knowing how to support their families,” Kaur said. “I myself come from a trucker family. We’re all facing the effects of this.”
Despite hitting a speed bump this week, Kaur said the Sikh trucking community remains hopeful.
“The Sikh sentiment is always to remain optimistic,” she said. “We’re not going to accept it — we’re just gonna continue to fight.”
California
Two Republicans lead race to be next California governor—New poll
Two Republican candidates are leading the latest poll in California’s gubernatorial race amid concerns that Democrats could be locked out of the general election in the solidly blue state.
Newsweek reached out to the California Democratic and Republican parties for comment via email.
Why It Matters
California is a solidly Democratic state that rarely elects Republicans to statewide office. However, Democrats are facing a potential challenge in next year’s gubernatorial race. The Golden State uses a unique “jungle primary” system where all candidates, regardless of their party, appear on the same ballot and the two candidates who receive the most votes advance to the general election. This means there is a possible, even if unlikely, scenario where two Republicans could advance to the general election and lock Democrats out of the race.
A string of recent polls suggests that could be a possibility in the race next year to replace retiring Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, who cannot run for a third term due to term limits.
What To Know
California’s gubernatorial race has drawn the interest of several well-known Democrats in the state including Representative Eric Swalwell, former Representative Katie Porter, former Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Xavier Becerra, businessman Tom Steyer, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and former Controller Betty Yee.
By contrast, two well-known Republicans—Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and commentator Steve Hilton—are in the race.
The math problem for Democrats would be if the high number of Democrats split the vote in a way that allows Bianco and Hilton to narrowly advance to the general election. Early polls show that as a possibility, though there is still time for Democratic voters to coalesce around specific candidates before June’s primary.
On Thursday, pollster Civic Lens Research released a survey showing Bianco and Hilton advancing to the general election. Hilton led with just under 18 percent of the vote, while Bianco followed with about 14 percent.
Swalwell placed third with about 12 percent support, while Porter and Steyer followed with 9 and 7 percent support, respectively. Still, many voters are still unsure of who they are going to support—and could be decisive in the race. Thirty-one percent said they were undecided in the poll.
The poll surveyed 400 likely California primary voters via a web questionnaire sent by text message between December 14 and 16.
Other polls have also showed a Democratic lockout as a possibility. An Emerson College poll, which surveyed 1,000 likely voters from December 1-2, showed Bianco leading with 13 percent, while Hilton and Swalwell were tied at 12 percent. An FM3 poll showed Hilton lead with 18 percent, followed by Bianco and Swalwell at 17 percent. It surveyed 821 likely voters from November 30 to December 7 and had a margin of error of plus or minus four percentage points.
Zev Yaroslavsky, a former member of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and director of the Los Angeles Initiative at the University of California, Los Angeles, told Newsweek polls are “largely reflecting name identification and party identification.”
“Voters are not focused on the June primary yet,” he said. “With only two Republicans in the mix along with half a dozen or more well-known Democrats, it is not surprising that most of the candidates are bunched up.”
Democratic and undecided voters are likely to “consolidate behind one or two prominent candidates” by the spring, Yaroslavsky said, noting that other candidates will either drop out or “just be relegated to electoral irrelevancy.”
“The top Democrat will assuredly receive far more than 13% in June. Republicans have a ceiling of what they can hope to get in California, and when Democratic and independent voters coalesce around on or two candidates, at least one of the leading Democratic candidates will come in first or second and advance to the general election. At that point, it’s the Democrats’ to lose,” he said.
What People Are Saying
Corrin Rankin, chairwoman of the California Republican Party, told Newsweek in November: “Poll after poll shows Californians are tired of the decades of failure and corruption by Democrats, and they are turning to Republicans for real solutions and leadership on issues like affordability, public safety, and homelessness.”
Rusty Hicks, chair of the California Democratic Party, told Newsweek in November: “We look forward to electing another Democrat as California’s next Governor in 2026.”
What Happens Next?
The primary is set for June 2, 2026, so candidates will spend the first half of next year making their case to voters to convince them they are the best option to lead the nation’s most populous state.
-
Iowa6 days agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Iowa1 week agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine5 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland6 days agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
Technology1 week agoThe Game Awards are losing their luster
-
South Dakota7 days agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
New Mexico4 days agoFamily clarifies why they believe missing New Mexico man is dead
-
World1 week agoCoalition of the Willing calls for transatlantic unity for Ukraine