Politics
A New Pacific Arsenal to Counter China
Since the start of his administration, President Biden has undertaken a strategy to expand American military access to bases in allied nations across the Asia-Pacific region and to deploy a range of new weapons systems there. He has also said the U.S. military would defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion.
On Wednesday, Mr. Biden signed a $95-billion supplemental military aid and spending bill that Congress had just passed and that includes $8.1 billion to counter China in the region. And Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken traveled to Shanghai and Beijing this week for meetings in which he planned to raise China’s aggressive actions around Taiwan and the South China Sea.
Earlier in April, the leaders of the Philippines and Japan met with Mr. Biden at the White House for the first such summit among the three countries. They announced enhanced defense cooperation, including naval training and exercises, planned jointly and with other partners. Last year, the Biden administration forged a new three-way defense pact with Japan and South Korea.
President Biden held a trilateral meeting earlier this month with the leaders of Japan and the Philippines at the White House.
Yuri Gripas for The New York Times
“In 2023, we drove the most transformative year for U.S. force posture in the Indo-Pacific region in a generation,” Ely Ratner, the assistant secretary of defense for Indo-Pacific security affairs, said in a statement following an interview.
The main change, he said, is having American forces distributed in smaller, more mobile units across a wide arc of the region rather than being concentrated at large bases in northeast Asia. That is largely intended to counter China’s efforts to build up forces that can target aircraft carriers or U.S. military outposts on Okinawa or Guam.
These land forces, including a retrained and refitted U.S. Marine littoral regiment in Okinawa, will now have the ability to attack warships at sea.
For the first time, Japan’s military will receive up to 400 of their own Tomahawk missiles — the newest versions of which can attack ships at sea as well as targets on land from over 1,150 miles away.
The Pentagon has also gained access rights for its troops at four additional bases in the Philippines that could eventually host U.S. warplanes and advanced mobile missile launchers, if Washington and Manila agree that offensive weaponry can be placed there.
The United States has bilateral mutual defense agreements with several allied nations in the region so that an attack on the assets of one nation could trigger a response from the other. Bolstering the U.S. troop presence on the soil of allied countries strengthens that notion of mutual defense.
In addition, the United States continues to send weapons and Green Beret trainers to Taiwan, a de facto independent island and the biggest flashpoint between the United States and China. Mr. Xi has said his nation must eventually take control of Taiwan, by force if necessary.
“We’ve deepened our alliances and partnerships abroad in ways that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago,” Kurt Campbell, the new deputy secretary of state, told reporters last year, when he was the top Asia policy official in the White House.
What Deters China?
Taiwan’s foreign minister, Joseph Wu, said in an interview in Taipei that the strengthened alliances and evolving military force postures were critical to deterring China.
“We are very happy to see that many countries in this region are coming to the realization that they also have to be prepared for further expansions of the P.R.C.,” he said, referring to the People’s Republic of China.
To some Chinese military strategists, the U.S. efforts are aimed at keeping China’s naval forces behind the “first island chain” — islands close to mainland Asia that run from Okinawa in Japan to Taiwan to the Philippines.
U.S. military assets along these islands could prevent Chinese warships from getting into the open Pacific waters farther east if conflict were to break out.
Leaders in China’s People’s Liberation Army also talk of establishing military dominance of the “second island chain” — which is farther out in the Pacific and includes Guam, Palau and West Papua.
But several conservative critics of the administration’s policies argue that the United States should be keeping major arms for its own use and that it is not producing new ships and major weapons systems quickly enough to deter China, which is rapidly growing its military.
Some American commanders acknowledge the United States needs to speed up ship production but say the Pentagon’s warfighting abilities in the region still outmatch China’s — and can improve quickly with the right political and budget commitments in Washington.
“We have actually grown our combat capability here in the Pacific over the last years,” said Adm. Samuel J. Paparo Jr., the incoming commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command. “But our trajectory is still not a trajectory that matches our adversary. Our adversaries are building more capability and they’re building more warships — per year — than we are.”
Mr. Paparo said new American warships were still more capable than the ones China is building, and the U.S. military’s “total weight of fires” continued to outmatch that of the People’s Liberation Army, for now.
Warplanes on the flight deck of U.S.S. Carl Vinson, an aircraft carrier, during a joint U.S. and Japanese military exercise in the Philippine Sea in January.
Richard A. Brooks/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, a Cold War-era arms control agreement between Washington and Moscow, prohibited land-based cruise or ballistic missiles with ranges between 311 miles and 3,420 miles. But after the Trump administration withdrew from the pact, the United States was able to develop and field a large number of small, mobile launchers for previously banned missiles around Asia.
Even with the deployment of new systems, the United States would still rely on its legacy assets in the region in the event of war: its bases in Guam, Japan and South Korea, and the troops and arms there.
All of the senior U.S. officials interviewed for this story say war with China is neither desirable nor inevitable — a view expressed publicly by Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III. But they also insist that a military buildup and bolstering alliances, along with diplomatic talks with China, are important elements of deterring potential future aggression by Beijing.
Chen Jining, the Communist Party chief in Shanghai, told Mr. Blinken on Thursday that “whether China and the U.S. choose cooperation or confrontation, it affects the well-being of both peoples, of both nations, and also the future of humanity.”
Japan
The new deterrent effort is twofold for American forces: increasing patrolling activities at sea and the capabilities of its troop levels ashore.
To the former, the Pentagon has announced that U.S. Navy warships will participate in more drills with their Japanese counterparts in the western Ryukyu Islands near Taiwan and with Filipino ships in the South China Sea, where the Chinese coast guard has harassed ships and installations controlled by the Philippines.
A swarm of Chinese militia and Coast Guard vessels chased a Philippine Coast Guard ship in the South China Sea last year.
Jes Aznar for The New York Times
To the latter, Marine Corps and Army units already in the Pacific have recently fielded medium- and long-range missiles mated to small, mobile trucks that would have been prohibited under the former treaty.
These trucks can be quickly lifted by Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft or larger cargo planes to new locations, or they can simply drive away to evade a Chinese counterattack. A new flotilla of U.S. Army watercraft being sent to the region could also be used to reposition troops and launchers from island to island.
In an interview last year with The New York Times, Gen. David H. Berger, then the Marine Corps’ top general, said the service had begun analyzing strategic choke points between islands where Chinese forces were likely to transit throughout the Pacific. He said the service had identified sites where Marine assault forces like the new Okinawa-based littoral regiment could launch attacks on Beijing’s warships using these new weapons.
Philippines
The Pentagon announced in February last year a new military base-sharing agreement with Manila, giving U.S. forces access to four sites in the Philippines for use in humanitarian missions, adding to the five sites previously opened to the Pentagon in 2014. Most of them are air bases with runways long enough to host heavy cargo planes.
Plotting their locations on a map shows the sites’ strategic value should the United States be called upon to defend their oldest treaty ally in the region, if the Philippines eventually agrees to allow the U.S. military to put combat troops and mobile missile systems there.
One, on the northern tip of Luzon Island, would give missile-launching trucks the ability to attack Chinese ships across the strait separating Philippines from Taiwan, while another site about 700 miles to the southwest would allow the U.S. to strike bases that China has built in the Spratly Islands nearby.
In 2023, the United States committed $100 million for “infrastructure investments” at the nine bases, with more funds expected this year.
Australia
The Pentagon has forged closer military ties with Australia and Papua New Guinea, extending America’s bulwark against potential attempts by the Chinese military at establishing dominance along the “second island chain.”
The Obama administration moved a number of littoral combat ships to Singapore and deployed a rotating force of Marines to Darwin, on Australia’s north coast, giving the Pentagon more assets that could respond as needed in the region.
Last year, the Biden administration greatly elevated its commitment to Australia, which is one of America’s most important non-NATO allies.
The U.S.S. North Carolina, a Virginia-class submarine, docking in Perth, Australia last year.
Tony Mcdonough/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
A new multibillion dollar agreement called AUKUS — for Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States — will permanently transfer some of the U.S. Navy’s newest Virginia-class attack subs to Canberra. The location of the new bases for those subs has not been announced, but the first group of Australian sailors who will crew them graduated from nuclear power training in America in January.
These stealthy submarines, which can fire torpedoes and Tomahawk missiles, will potentially add to the number of threats Beijing faces in case of a regional war.
Just north of Australia, an agreement in August gave U.S. forces more access to Papua New Guinea for humanitarian missions and committed American tax dollars to update military facilities there.
To Admiral Paparo, this growing network of partnerships and security agreements across thousands of miles of the Pacific is a direct result of what he calls China’s “revanchist, revisionist and expansionist agenda” in the region that has directly threatened its neighbors.
“I do believe that the U.S. and our allies and partners are playing a stronger hand and that we would prevail in any fight that arose in the Western Pacific,” the admiral said in an interview.
“It’s a hand that I would not trade with our would-be adversaries, and yet we’re also never satisfied with the strength of that hand and always looking to improve it.”
President Trump revealed a new plan on Monday to bring down gas prices that have soared since he chose to start a war with Iran: He wants to suspend federal gas taxes.
“I think it’s a great idea,” Mr. Trump said in a phone call with a reporter from CBS News on Monday morning. “Yup, we’re going to take off the gas tax for a period of time, and when gas goes down, we’ll let it phase back in.” A short while later, he mused more about the plan while speaking to reporters in the Oval Office.
He did not mention that such a move would require congressional approval. Asked when or even if the administration planned to approach lawmakers on Capitol Hill about suspending the tax, a representative for the White House said simply: “We refer you to the president’s comments from earlier today.”
Even if Mr. Trump succeeded in pausing federal gas taxes, prices might come down only a smidgen: federal taxes are a little over 18 cents a gallon for gasoline and about 24 cents a gallon for diesel. Prices are up about 50 percent since the war began.
The president acknowledged in the Oval Office on Monday that the drop would be slight.
“It’s a small percentage,” he said, “but it’s, you know, it’s still money.”
Some of Mr. Trump’s foes mocked the idea as too little, too late. “Yes please do throw the peasants some more bread crumbs,” Marjorie Taylor Greene, the former representative, posted on X.
Senator Mark Kelly, Democrat of Arizona, said he approved of Mr. Trump’s proposal. “Families need help now,” Mr. Kelly wrote. “Let’s get it done.” (Mr. Kelly had first proposed this idea back in March.)
The administration floated a halt to the gas tax — which funds road construction and repairs across the country — on Sunday, when the energy secretary, Chris Wright, proposed it on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” He said that “all measures that can be taken to lower the price of at the pump and lower the prices for Americans, this administration is in support of.”
Last month, Mr. Wright admitted that gas prices may remain elevated for months, even as the president promises they’ll plummet any day now. So far, studies have shown that the higher gas prices have hit lower-income Americans the hardest.
“As soon as this is over with Iran,” Mr. Trump said on Monday, “you’re going to see gasoline and oil drop like a rock.”
And yet, how soon is soon? He used that same meeting to shred the Iranians’ latest counterproposal as a “piece of garbage,” and said that the cease-fire was on “life support.” He insisted that Iran was in the grips of a powerful faction of “lunatics” who wanted to fight on for as long as possible.
In 2022, President Biden proposed this same idea to bring gas prices down. It never happened. Congress balked. Republicans slammed the idea as gimmicky and bad policy.
Politics
Left-wing governor ripped for ‘insane’ answer on whether he’d support minor son’s gender transition
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Democratic Maryland Gov. Wes Moore is facing social media backlash after saying during an interview he would support his underage son if he wanted to transition his gender identity.
“Maryland Governor Wes Moore says he would let his son go through gender mutilation as a minor if he wanted to,” RNC Research posted to X on May 7, accompanied by footage of the clip.
Moore, a prominent Democratic governor who has repeatedly clashed with Trump, has signed measures positioning Maryland as a haven for transgender rights and gender-transition care. He was asked a hypothetical question regarding his own son during a discussion on a podcast with American businessman Patrick Bet-David last week.
“Your son comes in saying he wants to transition, what do you do,” Bet-David asked Moore on his “PBD Podcast.”
HOSPITALS WARNED THEY MUST PROTECT CHILDREN FROM CHEMICAL AND SURGICAL MUTILATION: HHS AGENCY MEMO
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore says he would support his son’s gender transition as a minor. (Valerie Plesch/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
“If this is a journey that he wants to go down, um I want him to always be comfortable in his own skin,” Moore responded, saying his son would always have his “undying love.”
Bet-David pressed Moore on the question, asking whether he would still support his son if he were a minor. Moore said he would.
“I want him to feel safe in his own skin, safe in his own decision-making, but also know that, at 14 years old, I want to be involved inside of that process as well,” said Moore. “I’m not going to condemn him nor castigate him, I’m not going to kick him out of the house. I’m not going to do anything that’s going to hurt him, but I just want to make sure that I’m involved.”
However, Moore — a father of two children under 18 — said it would be “deeply unfair” to allow a child to go on puberty blockers, indicating he would not permit his own son to do so.
Social media commenters unleashed on Moore for appearing to support minors making life-altering decisions.
“That’s not empathy. That’s insanity. As a parent, you are called to guide your children toward the right decisions, not to affirm life-altering destructive ones. This speaks to Gov Wes Moore sacrificing his own child on the altar of woke transgenderism,” wrote Maryland Freedom Caucus vice chair Kathy Szelgia on X.
PARENTS MUST STAY ALERT AS PUBLIC SCHOOLS HIDE LIFE-ALTERING DECISIONS FROM FAMILIES
“I want him to feel safe in his own skin, safe in his own decision making, but also know that, at 14 years old, I want to be involved inside of that process as well,” said Moore. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
“There is a 0% chance he believes this. But this is how insane the Democrat party is,” said Outkick founder Clay Travis.
“This is the man trusted to run Maryland. Just thought you should know where he stands,” write the account Blue Lives Matter.
“INSANE: Maryland Governor Wes Moore says he would let his 12-year-old son go through gender mutilation as a minor if he wanted to,” conservative commentator Steve Guest posted in response.
“A child who can’t smoke, buy alcohol, vote and whose frontal lobe doesn’t fully develop till their mid 20’s is suddenly capable of rationally electing to permanently mutilate their body for the rest of their life,” wrote an X user. “Wes Moore has no business being an elected official.”
DETRANSITIONER CHLOE COLE SHARES COMPLICATIONS AFTER GENDER PROCEDURES: ‘I AM GRIEVING’
The Trump administration has pushed policies to protect children from “chemical and surgical mutilation.” (iStock)
“Good to know that you wouldn’t kick him out of the house, disown him, or hurt him. Next Question: Would the administration of puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones be hurting him,” asked another user.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The administration has taken a very strong stance against gender mutilation and puberty blockers following an executive order last year.
In December, the Department of Health and Human Services rolled out a series of policy updates and regulatory actions that would effectively defund hospitals that provide gender transition procedures,
Fox News Digital reached out to the Office of Governor Wes Moore and the White House for comment.
In Congress, Katie Porter’s blunt, combative style helped rocket her to progressive stardom. It has also become her biggest vulnerability as she campaigns to be California’s next governor.
Her brusque approach, prosecutorial instincts and suburban mom appeal fueled Porter’s rise during her three terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, where she rattled CEOs and Trump administration leaders and batted away GOP challengers in a competitive Orange County district.
Her tack, however, made her a polarizing force within her own party, where fidelity remains an essential currency of success and power. In Congress, Porter clashed with then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and L.A.’s Rep. Maxine Waters.
The same rough edges that endeared Porter to many voters have also alienated some Democratic insiders and interest groups whose support could prove critical in the race to replace outgoing Gov. Gavin Newsom.
Then-Rep. Katie Porter meets with parents, doctors and diabetic patients in her Irvine office in 2019.
(Mark Boster / For The Times)
“She came in [to the governor’s race] as an outsider, as a mom, as a fighter. She wasn’t pulled into the establishment,” said Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions. “I think that’s why she’s popular with voters, because they want somebody who’s going to fight, and sometimes that ruffles feathers.”
In the campaign for governor, Porter, a single mother of three, has struggled to convert grassroots popularity into broader institutional support. Even after former Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out of the race amid allegations of sexual assault, she has yet to see a major surge in support or endorsements from Democratic power brokers.
A pair of embarrassing videos continue to hang over her campaign. The videos, which surfaced in October, showed Porter yelling at a staff member and threatening to walk out of a television reporter’s interview.
As former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra has ascended and she remained stagnant in polls following Swalwell’s exit, Porter has increasingly sought to redeem her image. She poked fun at the incident with her staffer in an ad, smilingly asking a group of whiteboard-wielding supporters behind her to “please get out of my shot.”
In recent debates, Porter has sought to play up the qualities that made her a standout among resistance-era progressives, needling former hedge fund executive Tom Steyer over his past investments in private prisons and pressing Becerra for a “yes” or “no” on statewide single-payer healthcare. Porter emphasizes her support for single-payer healthcare, providing free child care and college tuition and making wealthy corporations pay their “fair share” in taxes.
Porter said she wants to increase taxes on the state’s wealthiest residents but doesn’t support the proposed billionaire’s tax ballot measure because it is a “one-time tax” that won’t solve the state’s underlying budget issues.
During a particularly chaotic debate last week, she scolded her opponents’ incessant interruptions and called out what she considered a double standard over her behavior.
“I can’t believe, with [the] interrupting and name-calling and shouting and disrespect for everyone up here who’s stepping into public service that anyone wants to talk about my temperament,” she said during the May 5 debate on CNN.
Though she acknowledged she mishandled both caught-on-tape situations and said she apologized to the staffer, the videos hindered her early momentum and have undercut her efforts to make inroads with potential allies in the race.
Porter speaks at a gubernatorial candidates forum on Sept. 28, 2025, in Los Angeles.
(Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times)
Influential lawmakers, labor groups and party insiders have coalesced behind Becerra and Steyer, her top Democratic rivals.
Porter has scored some key endorsements. She is one of three candidates backed by the California Federation of Labor Unions, along with Steyer and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. She also has support from Teamsters California, the National Union of Healthcare Workers and progressive groups such as Emilys List and California Environmental Voters, which dual-endorsed her and Steyer.
Union support is pivotal for Democratic candidates in California, sending a clear signal that they support the priorities of working-class voters. For Porter, who has proudly refused to accept corporate donations throughout her political career, the labor endorsements also help her attract the small-dollar donations that are essential to her campaign.
While in Congress, Porter proved to be a prodigious fundraiser. In her last reelection campaign for the House of Representatives in 2022, she raised more than $25.6 million in contributions — the second-most in Congress, behind only Bakersfield’s Rep. Kevin McCarthy, who was then the House Republican leader.
Still, her backing from elected Democrats remains comparatively thin. Along with her mentor, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), just three members of Congress have endorsed her gubernatorial bid: Reps. Robert Garcia of Long Beach, Dave Min of Irvine and Derek Tran of Huntington Beach. She also picked up an endorsement from Assemblywoman Cottie Petrie-Norris (D-Irvine) after Swalwell dropped out.
Though none would speak publicly, multiple sources who work in and around the state Capitol expressed concerns about Porter’s temperament and her willingness to work collaboratively with people she disagrees with.
“Katie Porter hurt herself big time because she needs anger management and she doesn’t have the temperament” to be governor, Democratic former Sen. Barbara Boxer said during a recent interview with NewsNation’s Leland Vittert.
Through her campaign spokesperson, Porter declined to be interviewed for for this story.
Porter questions Tim Sloan, president and chief executive officer of Wells Fargo, during a House Financial Services Committee hearing in Washington in 2019.
(Andrew Harrer / Bloomberg)
Defenders argue the backlash reflects a double standard for women in politics — a salient point in a state that, despite its liberal reputation, has never elected a woman as governor.
“Sacramento sizes up every gubernatorial candidate the same way: Can they win, and is this someone I actually want to work with?” said Elizabeth Ashford, a Democratic consultant who is not working with any of the candidates running for governor. “The videos showed an angry woman, and for a lot of people that translated to ‘I don’t want her as my boss.’
“It’s a double standard that dogs women in politics. Jerry Brown was famous for his loud, unfiltered outbursts and nobody questioned whether he was up to the job,” said Ashford, who served as the former governor’s deputy press secretary.
Gonzalez agreed, arguing that women who stand up for themselves “are often labeled as ‘difficult.’ Probably a lot of people think I’m difficult,” the labor leader added with a laugh.
Born in Iowa, Porter often connects her politics to her family’s financial struggles after losing their farm during the 1980s farm crisis. She earned degrees from Yale and Harvard, where she studied bankruptcy law under Warren. In 2012, while working as a law professor at UC Irvine, Porter was appointed by then-Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris to oversee California’s $18-billion mortgage settlement.
After defeating Republican incumbent Rep. Mimi Walters in 2018, Porter quickly emerged as one of the Democratic Party’s most recognizable progressives. Armed with a whiteboard and other visual aids in congressional hearings, she confronted banking and pharmaceutical executives over drug prices, consumer debt and corporate profits.
The props, theatrical at times, seemed to aggravate Waters, then the Democratic chairwoman of the Financial Services Committee. On several occasions, Waters sided with Republicans who challenged Porter’s use of visual and audio aids during hearings.
“Please do not raise your board. We’ve talked about this before,” the chairwoman scolded when Porter tried to hold up a “Financial Services Bingo” card during a 2019 hearing on debt collection. (She later got to show the board on “Late Night with Seth Meyers.”)
Eager to force change they campaigned on, Porter and other freshmen, including members of “The Squad,” at times clashed with Pelosi and other Democratic leaders.
Porter speaks to volunteers while campaigning in Mission Viejo in 2018.
(Victoria Kim / Los Angeles Times )
Porter has slammed lawmakers, including Democrats, for stock trading and funneling earmark funding to their home districts, arguing that such practices breed corruption and mistrust in Congress. The critiques irked Pelosi, a powerful force in California politics.
In her second term, the Orange County Democrat lost her coveted spot on the Financial Services Committee after she listed it as her third choice and requested a waiver to stay on it. Typically, members prioritize such high-profile committees and request waivers to serve on lesser ones in addition. The move was seen as a risk, the result a check on Porter’s ambition.
“So many of us, regardless of ideology, run on ‘shaking up Washington.’ But then when you actually come here, there’s a lot of consequences for doing that,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told The Times after Porter lost the committee position.
Porter’s willingness to buck party norms also raised eyebrows during her Senate campaign, when she entered the race for Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s seat before Feinstein had announced retirement plans in early 2023. Although then-Rep. Adam Schiff also launched an early campaign, he did so only after privately seeking Feinstein’s blessing. She ultimately finished third in the primary.
Her decision to run for Senate did not ingratiate her with Washington’s Democratic leadership. The party was forced to spend millions to ensure another Democrat was elected to her contested Orange County congressional seat, and Schiff, her top rival in the race, was a close ally of Pelosi — who endorsed him — and helped lead the first impeachment effort against President Trump.
Controversy surrounding Porter’s personal relationships have also surfaced during previous campaigns. In 2024, she obtained a five-year restraining order against a former boyfriend who she said bombarded her and her children with threatening messages.
When a whisper campaign about the end of her marriage threatened her first House run, Porter shared details of her 2013 divorce with the Huffington Post, including that her ex-husband, Matthew Hoffman, physically intimidated and verbally abused her. Hoffman also claimed to be the victim of abuse, including an incident in which Porter allegedly threw hot mashed potatoes at him. Both filed for restraining orders and sought anger management during the divorce.
Former employees have also rallied to her defense. In an open letter last month, 30 former staffers described Porter as a “workhorse” who “asked of us what she expected of herself.”
“She demanded a lot, but she also fought for us, mentored us, and stood by us when life got hard,” the former aides wrote. “We believe the public should understand the full person we know, not a caricature built from a few clips on a bad day.”
Porter has argued that voters are looking for someone willing to challenge powerful interests rather than accommodate them.
Katie Porter is interviewed after the California Gubernatorial debate at Skirball Cultural Center on Wednesday.
(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)
“It’s on me to keep campaigning and keep demonstrating that,” she told reporters after a recent gubernatorial debate in San Francisco. “It’s also not lost on me that the last time the Democratic Party had a woman nominee for governor was 1994, when I was in college.”
The affordability crisis is at the forefront of the race to replace term-limited Newsom. As a single parent, Porter argues she is acutely aware of gas and grocery prices — as well as higher-stakes consequences.
She described feeling shocked when, during a recent conversation with her 17-year-old son, he asked if she would visit him if he moved to another state.
“I said, ‘Paul, you love California, why would you leave California?’ And he said, ‘Well, I’m thinking I might want to have a family and I might want to have a house, and I know that means I’ll have to leave California,’” Porter recounted at a March forum hosted by the California Assn. of Realtors. “We need to be a state that doesn’t just retain people like my son … but welcomes new families.”
The centerpiece of her proposed “affordability solutions” are free child care, free tuition at UC and CSU schools for students who complete two years of community college, and ending income taxes for those who earn less than $100,000 — an idea she acknowledges she “stole” from Republican candidate Steve Hilton. “I will take a good idea anywhere I can get it,” she said at a recent forum.
To pay for it, Porter would impose a progressive corporate tax, meaning more profitable businesses and corporations would pay a higher rate. A less than 1% tax hike on businesses that earn hundreds of millions in profit would bring in around $8 billion, according to her website.
“I think she deeply and personally understands the everyday struggles that so many Californians are grappling with right now,” said Petrie-Norris, who last month became the first state legislator to endorse Porter.
While Petrie-Norris describes herself as more politically moderate than Porter, the Irvine assemblywoman praised her as a “pragmatic problem-solver” and “proven fighter” who has taken on corporate interests and the Trump administration.
For a while, Porter was one of four women among the major candidates running for governor. One by one they have dropped out of the race, citing difficulties raising money and support.
After sharing the debate stage with five men recently, Porter was asked whether California is ready for a female governor.
“I sure as hell hope so,” she said.
-
California5 minutes agoGOP California governor candidates to face off at Clovis forum ahead of primary
-
Colorado11 minutes agoCoworking firm Industrious takes former WeWork space in Denver
-
Connecticut17 minutes agoNew Haven man found with ‘Super Mario’ meth pills to serve federal prison time
-
Delaware23 minutes agoWho governs matters: Why school board elections deserve your attention
-
Florida29 minutes agoSouth Florida officers sue Ben Affleck and Matt Damon, claiming details in ‘The Rip’ are too real
-
Georgia35 minutes agoGeorgia Democrats seek answers from Justice Department over Fulton election worker subpoena
-
Hawaii41 minutes agoMan killed while changing tire after crash in South Kohala
-
Idaho47 minutes agoDelicious New Menu Item Expected To Hit Idaho Costcos Soon