Connect with us

Politics

Column: Is it time for California's Latino Legislative Caucus to let in Republicans?

Published

on

Column: Is it time for California's Latino Legislative Caucus to let in Republicans?

Over the phone, Lena Gonzalez’s voice had the patient but proud tone of a lawyer charged with defending the damned.

Her metaphorical client: The California Latino Legislative Caucus, which the Long Beach-area state senator heads.

At 38 members strong, it’s one of the largest groups of its kind in the United States and has long served as the tip of California’s progressive spear. Members helped transform the state within a generation from a place that birthed the notorious anti-immigrant Proposition 187 into one where undocumented people can apply for driver’s licenses, health insurance, get in-state college tuition and more.

Then the 2024 elections happened.

Latinos shifted toward Donald Trump nationwide in numbers that continue to make headlines and confound Democratic leaders. It happened in deep-blue California too. In the blue-collar, overwhelming Mexican Anaheim precinct where my father lives, support from Joe Biden to Kamala Harris dropped from 73% in 2020 to 60% this year. Trump nabbed 36% of the vote — though not from my father, who thinks he’s a “loco” — despite the former and future president’s promise to deport as many undocumented immigrants as he can.

Advertisement

Eight Latino Republicans now serve in the state Legislature, doubling the former record set just two years ago. Their districts span California from the border to the Sierra, the Central Valley to Orange County, as do their life stories: children of immigrants, multiethnic, multigenerational.

They make up 18% of all California Latino legislators, in a state where a survey released this year by the National Assn. of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials — headed by a Downey Latina Republican council member — found 16% of Latinos are registered as Republicans.

This new reality is why I was calling Gonzalez.

Since it started in 1973, the Latino Legislative Caucus has excluded GOP members. The ban was easy to justify, I told Gonzalez, when there were only a few raza Republicans in Sacramento and they were seen as little better than vendidos — sellouts.

But given how Latino voters shifted this election day, is it time for the caucus to roll out the red carpet for their Republican colleagues?

Advertisement

“That is a good question,” Gonzalez responded. “We’re obviously racking with this in our brains. This year is very different. We saw a flip in the Imperial Valley that we thought we’d get.”

Republican freshman Assemblymember Jeff Gonzalez, center, watches the Assembly’s organizational session in Sacramento in November.

(Rich Pedroncelli/Associated Press)

She was talking about Assembly District 36, where newbie Jeff Gonzalez (no relation to Lena) triumphed over a candidate supported by the Coachella Valley Latino political machine that has dominated elected office out there for a generation.

Advertisement

She also mentioned the Inland Empire’s 58th Assembly District, where first-time candidate Leticia Castillo beat Clarissa Cervantes, the sister of state senator and former Latino Legislative Caucus chair Sabrina Cervantes, by just 596 votes.

“I have to talk to our caucus,” Gonzalez continued. She said some members are considering admitting Latino Republicans, while “others have said, ‘Absolutely not.’”

It’s weird times for Latino politics in California, even as Democrats still hold a supermajority in both legislative chambers, one of our U.S. senators is Pacoima native Alex Padilla and Latino caucus members Robert Rivas and Gonzalez are, respectively, speaker of the Assembly and Senate majority leader. Pundits long predicted that the template Latino Democrats created in California in the wake of Proposition 187 for electoral success — align with labor, grow government and advocate for undocumented residents — would spread nationwide and secure the future of the Democratic Party as this nation turns more Latino.

Now, Gonzalez admits, Latino Dems can no longer shun their GOP cousins like the weirdo branch of the family at a carne asada.

“It may not be in the caucus,” she said, “but we’re going to have to work with them in other capacities, clearly.”

Advertisement

For decades, Latino Republicans have lambasted the Latino caucus for not letting them in, sparking attempts to create their own group (it went nowhere) and a state investigation into whether a partisan ethnic caucus was even legal in the first place (it was).

Now, giddily thinking about what’s next for them, the Latino Republicans I talked to have adopted the old Groucho Marx adage of not wanting to belong to a club that would have them as a member.

Abel Maldonado, a former Santa Maria Assembly member and state senator who was one of the last Republicans to hold statewide office when he served as lieutenant governor in 2010, dismissed the Latino caucus as little better than a party crew.

“It’s great to go have dinner with the caucus and have a glass of wine,” he said, half-serious and half-not. “I miss going with Fabian [Nuñez] and Antonio [Villaraigosa] and — en paz descanse [may he rest in peace] — Marco Firebaugh,” the late southeastern L.A. County Assembly member.

“It was fun to go out in nighttime,” Maldonado continued, “but during the day, their policies hurt Latinos. They’ll tell you they’re for the poor, but they fail to tell you they keep you poor.”

Advertisement

His advice to Republican Latinos: “Don’t be part of this caucus that caused” California’s current problems.

They talk about a lot about diversity, but they’re not interested in diversity of thought, in differing political opinions.

— Assemblymember Josh Hoover on Latino Democratic legislators

Assemblymember Josh Hoover, who represents a Sacramento-area district, said his fellow Latino GOP legislators have a text thread on which they trade ideas and wonder whether they should start their own group. (That’s what Latino Republicans did in Congress, forming the Congressional Hispanic Conference in 2003 to distinguish themselves from the heavily Democratic Congressional Hispanic Caucus.)

Advertisement

About a third of all California Republican legislators are now Latino. “That’s a big deal,” he said. “It shows that the Republican Party is not the party that has been painted by the left.”

Hoover said the caucus’ rejection of people like him showed “they talk about a lot about diversity, but they’re not interested in diversity of thought, in differing political opinions. That’s something that needs to change in California.”

Two people talk to each other.

State Sen. Robert Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) talks with state Sen. Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh (R-Yucaipa) at the Capitol in Sacramento in 2022.

(Rich Pedroncelli/Associated Press)

Inland Empire Sen. Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh, the daughter of immigrants from the Mexican state of Yucatán, became California’s first Latina Republican state senator when she was elected in 2020; now, there are three. She remembered running into Latino Legislative Caucus members at a dinner her first year in office and initially being upset that she couldn’t join them.

Advertisement

“Like in high school when you’re not part of a group — you know how you felt like the outsider, but you felt like you belonged?” Ochoa Bogh said. “Then I thought about it and felt it wasn’t right. I thought, ‘I’m more Latina than many of these folks!’”

She acknowledged that the caucus had a good reason to form 51 years ago “because they probably felt they didn’t have a voice then.” Now, Latinos make up a plurality of Californians — and Ochoa Bogh argued that an ethnic caucus makes no sense.

“I think California, as a whole in this election, really conveyed a strong message that they’re done with creating all of these segments instead of uniting us all together,” she said. “Besides, if the Latino population aren’t getting their needs met right now, it’s Latino Democrats in charge, not the Republicans.”

The odds of the Latino caucus reexamining its Democrats-only rules shrank dramatically, however, after the special session called by Gov. Gavin Newsom this month to prepare California for an expected onslaught of Trump legal actions against the state.

On the first day, Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil — a former caucus member who switched her party registration last year from Democrat to Republican — took to social media to call Gonzalez “the grand wizard of the Latino KLAUCUS” after Alvarado-Gil claimed Gonzalez tried to kick her out of a break room.

Advertisement

Gonzalez declined to discuss the matter. “We have work to do, and I don’t want us to be distracted by what someone said to someone else,” said Gonzalez of Alvarado-Gil, whose office didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Democrats eventually passed a bill that would set aside a $25-million anti-Trump legal fund, including protecting undocumented residents.

“One thing that we [the Latino caucus] stand united for is against mass deportation,” said Gonzalez, who just introduced a bill that would establish a state agency to help immigrants and refugees. “Not one Republican supported the bill.” It’s hard to endorse caucus membership, she said, for those unwilling to support “a very basic value of the Latino caucus.”

When I pointed out that anti-immigrant sentiment among Latinos in California is higher than ever before and maybe her Latino Republican colleagues were onto something, Gonzalez cut right to the proverbial point.

“We’ve got a lot to work on ourselves, but we got to work on ourselves before letting them in.”

Advertisement

Politics

Wyoming Supreme Court rules laws restricting abortion violate state constitution

Published

on

Wyoming Supreme Court rules laws restricting abortion violate state constitution

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Wyoming Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that a pair of laws restricting abortion access violate the state constitution, including the country’s first explicit ban on abortion pills.

The court, in a 4-1 ruling, sided with the state’s only abortion clinic and others who had sued over the abortion bans passed since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, which returned the power to make laws on abortion back to the states.

Despite Wyoming being one of the most conservative states, the ruling handed down by justices who were all appointed by Republican governors upheld every previous lower court ruling that the abortion bans violated the state constitution.

Wellspring Health Access in Casper, the abortion access advocacy group Chelsea’s Fund and four women, including two obstetricians, argued that the laws violated a state constitutional amendment affirming that competent adults have the right to make their own health care decisions.

Advertisement

TRUMP URGES GOP TO BE ‘FLEXIBLE’ ON HYDE AMENDMENT, IGNITING BACKLASH FROM PRO-LIFE ALLIES

The Wyoming Supreme Court ruled that a pair of laws restricting abortion access violate the state constitution. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Voters approved the constitutional amendment in 2012 in response to the federal Affordable Care Act, which is also known as Obamacare.

The justices in Wyoming found that the amendment was not written to apply to abortion but noted that it is not their job to “add words” to the state constitution.

“But lawmakers could ask Wyoming voters to consider a constitutional amendment that would more clearly address this issue,” the justices wrote.

Advertisement

Wellspring Health Access President Julie Burkhart said in a statement that the ruling upholds abortion as “essential health care” that should not be met with government interference.

“Our clinic will remain open and ready to provide compassionate reproductive health care, including abortions, and our patients in Wyoming will be able to obtain this care without having to travel out of state,” Burkhart said.

Wellspring Health Access opened as the only clinic in the state to offer surgical abortions in 2023, a year after a firebombing stopped construction and delayed its opening. A woman is serving a five-year prison sentence after she admitted to breaking in and lighting gasoline that she poured over the clinic floors.

Wellspring Health Access opened as the only clinic in the state to offer surgical abortions in 2023, a year after a firebombing stopped construction. (AP)

Attorneys representing the state had argued that abortion cannot violate the Wyoming constitution because it is not a form of health care.

Advertisement

Republican Gov. Mark Gordon expressed disappointment in the ruling and called on state lawmakers meeting later this winter to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting abortion that residents could vote on this fall.

An amendment like that would require a two-thirds vote to be introduced as a nonbudget matter in the monthlong legislative session that will primarily address the state budget, although it would have significant support in the Republican-dominated legislature.

“This ruling may settle, for now, a legal question, but it does not settle the moral one, nor does it reflect where many Wyoming citizens stand, including myself. It is time for this issue to go before the people for a vote,” Gordon said in a statement.

APPEALS COURT SIDES WITH TRUMP ON BUDGET PROVISION CUTTING PLANNED PARENTHOOD FUNDS

Gov. Mark Gordon expressed disappointment in the ruling. (Getty Images)

Advertisement

One of the laws overturned by the state’s high court attempted to ban abortion, but with exceptions in cases where it is needed to protect a pregnant woman’s life or in cases of rape or incest. The other law would have made Wyoming the only state to explicitly ban abortion pills, although other states have implemented de facto bans on abortion medication by broadly restricting abortion.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Abortion has remained legal in the state since Teton County District Judge Melissa Owens blocked the bans while the lawsuit challenging the restrictions moved forward. Owens struck down the laws as unconstitutional in 2024.

Last year, Wyoming passed additional laws requiring abortion clinics to be licensed surgical centers and women to receive ultrasounds before having medication abortions. A judge in a separate lawsuit blocked those laws from taking effect while that case moves forward.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

What Trump’s vow to withhold federal child-care funding means in California

Published

on

What Trump’s vow to withhold federal child-care funding means in California

Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state Democratic leaders accused President Trump of unleashing a political vendetta after he announced plans to freeze roughly $10 billion in federal funding for child care and social services programs in California and four other Democrat-controlled states.

Trump justified the action in comments posted on his social media platform Truth Social, where he accused Newsom of widespread fraud. The governor’s office dismissed the accusation as “deranged.”

Trump’s announcement came amid a broader administration push to target Democratic-led states over alleged fraud in taxpayer-funded programs, following sweeping prosecutions in Minnesota. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services confirmed the planned funding freeze, which was first reported by the New York Post.

California officials said they have received no formal notice and argued the president is using unsubstantiated claims to justify a move that could jeopardize child care and social services for low-income families.

Advertisement

How we got here

Trump posted on his social media site Truth Social on Tuesday that under Newsom, California is “more corrupt than Minnesota, if that’s possible???” In the post, Trump used a derogatory nickname for Newsom that has become popular with the governor’s critics, referring to him as “Newscum.”

“The Fraud Investigation of California has begun,” Trump wrote.

The president also retweeted a story by the New York Post that said his Department of Health and Human Services will freeze taxpayer funding from the Child Care Development Fund, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which is known as CalWORKS in California, and the Social Services Block Grant program. Health and Human Services said the affected states are California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York.

“For too long, Democrat-led states and Governors have been complicit in allowing massive amounts of fraud to occur under their watch,” said Andrew Nixon, a department spokesperson. “Under the Trump Administration, we are ensuring that federal taxpayer dollars are being used for legitimate purposes. We will ensure these states are following the law and protecting hard-earned taxpayer money.”

The department announced last month that all 50 states will have to provide additional levels of verification and administrative data before they receive more funding from the Child Care and Development Fund after a series of fraud schemes at Minnesota day-care centers run by Somali residents.

Advertisement

“The Trump Administration is using the moral guise of eliminating ‘fraud and abuse’ to undermine essential programs and punish families and children who depend on these services to survive, many of whom have no other options if this funding disappears,” Kristin McGuire, president of Young Invincibles, a young-adult nonprofit economic advocacy group, said in a statement. “This is yet another ideologically motivated attack on states that treats millions of families as pawns in a political game.”

California pushes back

Newsom’s office brushed off Trump’s post about fraud allegations, calling the president “a deranged, habitual liar whose relationship with reality ended years ago.” Newsom himself said he welcomes federal fraud investigations in the state, adding in an interview on MS NOW that aired Monday night: “Bring it on. … If he has some unique insight and information, I look forward to partnering with him. I can’t stand fraud.”

However, Newsom said cutting off funding hurts hardworking families who rely on the assistance.

“You want to support families? You believe in families? Then you believe in supporting child care and child-care workers in the workforce,” Newsom told MS NOW.

California has not been notified of any changes to federal child-care or social services funding. H.D. Palmer, a spokesperson for the Department of Finance, said the only indication from Washington that California’s child-care funding could be in jeopardy was the vague 5 a.m. post Tuesday by the president on Truth Social.

Advertisement

“The president tosses these social media missives in the same way Mardi Gras revelers throw beads on Bourbon Street — with zero regard for accuracy or precision,” Palmer said.

In the current state budget, Palmer said, California’s child-care spending is $7.3 billion, of which $2.2 billion is federal dollars. Newsom is set to unveil his budget proposal Friday for the fiscal year that begins July 1, which will mark the governor’s final spending plan before he terms out. Newsom has acknowledged that he is considering a 2028 bid for president, but has repeatedly brushed aside reporters’ questions about it, saying his focus remains on governing California.

Palmer said while details about the potential threat to federal child-care dollars remain unclear, what is known is that federal dollars are not like “a spigot that will be turned off by the end of the week.”

“There is no immediate cutoff that will happen,” Palmer said.

Since Trump took office, California has filed dozens of legal actions to block the president’s policy changes and funding cuts, and the state has prevailed in many of them.

Advertisement

What happened in Minnesota

Federal prosecutors say Minnesota has been hit by some of the largest fraud schemes involving state-run, federally funded programs in the country. Federal prosecutors estimate that as much as half of roughly $18 billion paid to 14 Minnesota programs since 2018 may be fraudulent, with providers accused of billing for services never delivered and diverting money for personal use.

The scale of the fraud has drawn national attention and fueled the Trump administration’s decision to freeze child-care funds while demanding additional safeguards before doling out money, moves that critics say risk harming families who rely on the programs. Gov. Tim Walz has ordered a third-party audit and appointed a director of program integrity. Amid the fallout, Walz announced he will not seek a third term.

Outrage over the fraud reached a fever pitch in the White House after a video posted online by an influencer purported to expose extensive fraud at Somali-run child-care centers in Minnesota. On Monday, that influencer, Nick Shirley, posted on the social media site X, “I ENDED TIM WALZ,” a claim that prompted calls from conservative activists to shift scrutiny to Newsom and California next.

Right-wing podcaster Benny Johnson posted on X that his team will be traveling to California next week to show “how criminal California fraud is robbing our nation blind.”

California officials have acknowledged fraud failures in the past, most notably at the Employment Development Department during the COVID-19 pandemic, when weakened safeguards led to billions of dollars in unemployment payments later deemed potentially fraudulent.

Advertisement

An independent state audit released last month found administrative vulnerabilities in some of California’s social services programs but stopped short of alleging widespread fraud or corruption. The California state auditor added the Department of Social Services to its high-risk list because of persistent errors in calculating CalFresh benefits, which provides food assistance to those in need — a measure of payment accuracy rather than criminal activity — warning that federal law changes could eventually force the state to absorb billions of dollars in additional costs if those errors are not reduced.

What’s at stake in California

The Trump administration’s plans to freeze federal child-care, welfare and social services funding would affect $7.3 billion in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families funding, $2.4 billion for child-care subsidies and more than $800 million for social services programs in the five states.

The move was quickly criticized as politically motivated because the targeted states were all Democrat-led.

“Trump is now illegally freezing childcare and other funding for working families, but only in blue states,” state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) said in a statement. “He says it’s because of ‘fraud,’ but it has nothing to do with fraud and everything to do with politics. Florida had the largest Medicaid fraud in U.S. history yet isn’t on this list.”

Added California Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister): “It is unconscionable for Trump and Republicans to rip away billions of dollars that support child care and families in need, and this has nothing to do with fraud. California taxpayers pay for these programs — period — and Trump has no right to steal from our hard-working residents. We will continue to fight back.”

Advertisement

Times staff writer Daniel Miller contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Walz Drops Re-Election Bid as Minnesota Fraud Scandal Grows

Published

on

Video: Walz Drops Re-Election Bid as Minnesota Fraud Scandal Grows

new video loaded: Walz Drops Re-Election Bid as Minnesota Fraud Scandal Grows

transcript

transcript

Walz Drops Re-Election Bid as Minnesota Fraud Scandal Grows

Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota abandoned his re-election bid to focus on handling a scandal over fraud in social service programs that grew under his administration.

“I’ve decided to step out of this race, and I’ll let others worry about the election while I focus on the work that’s in front of me for the next year.” “All right, so this is Quality Learing Center — meant to say Quality ‘Learning’ Center.” “Right now we have around 56 kids enrolled. If the children are not here, we mark absence.”

Advertisement
Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota abandoned his re-election bid to focus on handling a scandal over fraud in social service programs that grew under his administration.

By Shawn Paik

January 6, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending