Connect with us

Politics

California and Los Angeles County are getting tougher on crime. Here are the maps that show it

Published

on

California and Los Angeles County are getting tougher on crime. Here are the maps that show it

California and Los Angeles County are getting tougher on crime.

The stiffer penalties on some drug and theft crimes that voters recently approved with Proposition 36 took effect this month. Weeks earlier, in L.A. County, former federal prosecutor Nathan Hochman was sworn in as the new district attorney and kicked off his administration by reversing several policies that his progressive predecessor George Gascón put in place.

The 2024 general election saw California voters reverse course against criminal justice reform policies and candidates. Proposition 36 overhauls key parts of Proposition 47 that passed handily in 2014. A closer look at L.A. neighborhoods reveals where Proposition 36 and Hochman made headway and how opinions shifted compared with10 years ago.

In 2014, Proposition 47 was overwhelmingly approved by 90% of neighborhoods in L.A. County. It turned some nonviolent felonies into misdemeanors. Ten years later, 87% of neighborhoods that supported the ballot initiative voted to overhaul it.

All of the few neighborhoods that voted against reduced crime penalties in 2014 voted for harsher penalties with Proposition 36. Those include Santa Clarita, Glendora and La Mirada.

Advertisement

Longtime California pollster Mark DiCamillo, who directed polls for both Propositions 36 and 47, said both state measures were decided by the same swing groups: voters with “no party preference” and voters who consider their political ideology “middle of the road.”

“Those same swing voter blocks, which showed you there was support for Prop. 47 10 years ago, definitely changed their opinion and are now much more inclined to be supportive of Prop. 36,” DiCamillo said.

Former Rep. Jackie Speier, who had previously supported Proposition 47, said in a public statement that Proposition 36 is a “common-sense” adjustment to the previous law.

Comparing the polls for each ballot initiative reveals differences within age groups and political parties, adds DiCamillo.

Among voters with party preferences, Republicans were mixed on Proposition 47, with Democrats almost 4-to-1 in favor of turning nonviolent felonies into misdemeanors. In 2024, Republicans were 9-to-1 in favor of overhauling Proposition 47. Democrats were more mixed.

“So opinions switched, obviously, but the same age differences were there; the same party differences were there,” DiCamillo said. “You had the same kind of subgroup variations that we saw 10 years ago, but a very different view of the initiative.”

Advertisement

Executive Director Rev. Zachary Hoover of LA Voice, an interfaith community organization that helped pass Proposition 47 and organized against Proposition 36, said the team campaigned in L.A., Long Beach, Inglewood and the San Gabriel Valley.

In L.A. County, both ballot measures passed with 64% of votes, though the 2014 midterm saw a record low turnout for a general election.

LA Voice’s campaign against Proposition 36 reminded people of what Proposition 47 has accomplished, especially in places where people benefited from the initiative. But that was not the main message.

“We focused more on the deceptive nature of how 36 is being sold to us, and what it would really do and what we really need, which is strong investments in mental health and addiction support,” Hoover said.

“When we worked on Prop. 47, that was two years after the ‘three strikes’ [law],” Hoover said. “That was the period when a lot of people were starting to wake up to the ways in which the justice system has been racist and persists in having racialized outcomes to this day. People haven’t backed away from that.”

Voters also haven’t changed their opinion on the importance of treatment. The September Berkeley IGS poll found that nearly half of those surveyed said they support rehabilitation or other alternatives for first-time offenders.

Advertisement

However, imposing harsher penalties for repeat offenders was what drove support for Proposition 36.

“Across the country, regardless of your D.A., crime went up in certain ways during the pandemic in the entire country,” Hoover said. “We were disconnected from each other for a long time. To a certain extent, the world is more complicated now than it was 10 years ago.”

Who would be the next D.A. and how they would handle increased crime rates was a high profile issue in L.A. County this fall. Support for Proposition 36 went hand in hand with support for former federal prosecutor Hochman for district attorney. A large majority (75%) of precincts backed both the increased crime penalties of Proposition 36 and Hochman’s promises of law and order. Hochman beat incumbent Gascón by almost 20 points.

A preelection Berkeley IGS Poll analysis of likely L.A. County voters for Proposition 36 and district attorney found that the largest combination was voters who planned to vote for both Proposition 36 and Hochman (40%). The next largest pairing — those voting against the state measure and for Gascón — represented only 14% of voters.

In analyzing the two voter blocs, DiCamillo found that the biggest demographic differences were the political dimensions. L.A. voters who supported Proposition 36 and Hochman were a mix of those who considered themselves moderate or conservative. By contrast, 82% of those who voted for Gascón and no on Proposition 36 identified themselves as liberals.

An even mix of registered Democrats, Republicans and those who registered as “no party preference” or with a third party supported Proposition 36 and Hochman. Among voters who were against the ballot initiative and for Gascón, 74% were Democrats while the remaining were independents or registered with a minor party.

Advertisement

“Gascón had a base of the Democrats, but it wasn’t enough,” DiCamillo said. “If they were voting no on 36 and they were Democratic, they were very likely to be for Gascón, but that was a relatively narrow segment.” Forty-seven percent of Democrats supported Prop. 36.

Ninety-two percent of the precincts that went for Trump also voted yes on 36 and for Hochman for district attorney.

Gascón did not win any new neighborhoods in the general election. Hochman won all 33 neighborhoods that other candidates won in the March primary.

Advertisement

LA Voice Action, a political affiliate of LA Voice, worked to get Gascón elected in 2020. Hoover, who is also LA Voice Action’s executive director, said the group’s campaign to reelect him focused on promises that Gascón followed through with while he was in office, including not charging children as adults.

“He’s really been who he said he would be in a lot of ways,” Hoover said. “And those were things that people wanted then, and I think most of it hasn’t changed.”

Hochman ran as a centrist with a campaign that offered a “hard middle” approach to fighting crime. On election night, he credited his victory to a bipartisan coalition of people who considered public safety a “crossover issue” during polarizing political times.

With Proposition 36 now in effect, several other California officials have vowed to use the power of new legislation to hold people accountable, and criminal justice reform advocates show no signs of backing down.

Hoover noted that Hochman’s platform does include messages of moderation from the justice reform movement. During his inauguration speech, Hochman repeated his campaign promises to balance criminal justice reform and public safety and called California’s overpopulation in prisons a systemic failure. “I think he understood that to win, it couldn’t just be about ‘Gascon is bad’ and ‘crime is up,’” Hoover said. “We see, even in the campaign that was against the progressive reformer, signs of progressive reform messaging.”

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

Published

on

Video: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

new video loaded: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

transcript

transcript

Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill that would have required President Trump to obtain congressional authorization to continue waging war against Iran.

“The yeas are 47. The nays are 53. The motion to discharge is not approved.” “President Trump decided to attack Iran. That decision was profound, deliberate and correct. The president understands the weight of war.” “Why is Donald Trump hellbent on making history repeat itself? Why is he plunging America headfirst into a war that Americans do not want, and which he cannot even explain? The American people deserve a say, and that is what our resolution is about.”

Advertisement
Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill that would have required President Trump to obtain congressional authorization to continue waging war against Iran.

By Shawn Paik

March 5, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’

Published

on

DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

EXCLUSIVE: Newly obtained financial statements shed light on claims that former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s company made millions from a DHS advertising campaign.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem faced intense questioning during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, and Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., specifically called out the agency for contracting a public relations firm headed by McLaughlin’s husband, Benjamin Yoho.

“I have personally reviewed the allegations against Ms. McLaughlin, and I find them to be baseless,” DHS General Counsel James Percival told Fox News Digital. “Nothing illegal or unethical occurred with respect to these contracts. Ms. McLaughlin was not involved in selecting any subcontractors.

“She is, however, a superstar in the public affairs world, so I am not surprised that she married a successful businessman whose services were attractive to these outside firms.”

Advertisement

Newly obtained financial statements address allegations that former Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s firm improperly profited from a multimillion-dollar DHS ad campaign. Lawmakers pressed Secretary Kristi Noem over the contracts during a heated Senate hearing. (Jack Gruber/USA Today)

Kennedy alleged that Yoho’s firm, The Strategy Group, “got most of the money” out of what the Louisiana Republican senator says was $220 million in “television advertisements that feature [Noem] prominently.”

“I’m sorry,” Kennedy said. “Safe America Media was a company formed 11 days before you picked them. And that the Strategy Group got most of the money. And the head of that is married to your former spokesperson.”

“It’s just hard for me to believe knowing the president as I do, that you said, ‘Mr. President, here’s some ads I’ve cut, and I’m going to spend $220 million running them,’ that he would have agreed to that,” Kennedy explained. “I don’t think Russ Vought at OMB [Office of Management and Budget] would have agreed to that.”

‘YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED!’: PROTESTER DRAGGED FROM KRISTI NOEM’S SENATE HEARING

Advertisement

Senate scrutiny intensified over a DHS advertising campaign after Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., questioned whether a firm linked to McLaughlin’s husband benefited unfairly. DHS officials and the company deny any wrongdoing or multimillion-dollar profits. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The Strategy Group is a conservative advertising agency for which Yoho serves as CEO.

Figures obtained by Fox News Digital show a slightly lesser total advertising expenditure of approximately $185 million, with a total of roughly $146.5 million going to a campaign called “Save America.”

However, of the total that went to “Save America,” roughly $348,000 went to production costs, while the remaining $142 million went to “media buys.”

Sources at DHS say that media buys are the cost of actually buying the ads themselves, whether purchased from social media or for a TV ad.

Advertisement

Kennedy also alleged that the bidding process for the contracts never took place and that Safe America Media’s recent founding was a cause for concern and collusion between McLaughlin and her husband’s business. 

WATCH THE MOST VIRAL MOMENTS AS KRISTI NOEM’S HEARING GOES OFF THE RAILS

Debate over DHS’ “Save America” ad campaign intensified as senators challenged its costs and contractor ties, even as agency officials touted the initiative as a historic success in promoting self-deportation. (Graeme Sloan/Getty Images)

“Yes they did,” Noem responded during the hearing. “They went out to a competitive bid, and career officials at the department chose who would do those advertising commercials.”

The Strategy Group posted to X Tuesday that it never had a contract with the department. While it did receive several hundred thousand dollars for production costs associated with the advertising campaigns, The Strategy Group never made millions.

Advertisement

“The Strategy Group has never had a contract with DHS,” the post said. “We had a subcontract with Safe America [Media] for limited production services. Safe America paid us $226,137.17 total for 5 film shoots, 45 produced video advertisements and 6 produced radio advertisements.

DHS SPOKESWOMAN TRICIA MCLAUGHLIN TO LEAVE TRUMP ADMIN, SOURCE CONFIRMS

Critics raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest in a high-dollar DHS advertising effort, but department representatives say McLaughlin recused herself and that subcontracting decisions were made independently. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

“If you’re going to try to question our integrity, bring actual evidence — we did,” the post concluded.

Because these ads were purchased using public funds, all contract totals are publicly available. 

Advertisement

Lauren Bis, who took up the role of assistant secretary once McLaughlin left office, told Fox News Digital Tuesday that scrutiny from Republicans and Democrats over the advertising spending was unjustified because the campaigns resulted in “the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history.”

“Sanctuary politicians are attacking this ad campaign because it has been successful in CLOSING our borders and getting more than 2.2 million illegal aliens to LEAVE the U.S.,” Bis said. 

“The DHS domestic and international ad campaign was the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history. The results speak for themselves: 2.2 million illegal aliens self-deported, and we now have the most secure border in American history.”

KRISTI NOEM TO FACE SENATE GRILLING OVER MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTINGS AS DHS SHUTDOWN HITS WEEK 3

The Trump administration reaffirmed that all illegal immigrants are eligible for deportations as they focus on arresting violent criminals first.  (Raquel Natalicchio/Houston Chronicle via Getty Images)

Advertisement

Bis also compared the cost of arresting and deporting an illegal migrant to that of the minimal cost of an illegal migrant self-deporting. The department says the advertising campaign played a key role in marketing self-deportation.

A spokesperson at DHS also told Fox News Digital that contractors decide who they hire, fulfilling the terms of a contract, not the department itself. 

“By law, DHS cannot and does not determine, control or weigh in on who contractors hire or use to fulfill the terms of the contract,” a DHS spokesperson told Fox. “Those decisions are made by the contractor alone. We have only become aware of these companies because of this inquiry and did not hire those companies.”

The spokesperson also noted that McLaughlin “recused herself” from interactions with subcontractors to avoid “any perceived appearance of impropriety.”

“Upon hearing who the subcontractors were for production of the ad, Ms. McLaughlin recused herself from any interaction or engagement with any subcontractors to avoid any perceived appearance of impropriety,” the spokesperson continued. “DHS Office of Public Affairs is the program officer. Ms. McLaughlin oversees the DHS Office of Public Affairs, which is simply the vehicle for this contract.”

Advertisement

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem takes her seat as she arrives to testify during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)

McLaughlin told Fox News Digital the criticism of her and her family by senators at the hearing is a matter of public manipulation.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“This is yet another example of politicians intentionally trying to dupe and manipulate the public to try to manufacture division and anger,” McLaughlin told Fox News Digital. “The ad spend and contracts are a matter of public record, and the process was done by the book.

“These politicians would rather smear private citizens and American small businesses than do any basic research.”

Advertisement

Fox News Digital’s Alexandra Koch contributed to this report.

Related Article

DHS defends ad blitz amid Senate scrutiny, says campaign drove 2.2M self-deportations and saved taxpayers $39B
Continue Reading

Politics

Senate rejects war powers measure to withdraw forces from Iran

Published

on

Senate rejects war powers measure to withdraw forces from Iran

Senate Republicans blocked a war powers resolution Wednesday designed to withdraw U.S. forces from hostilities in Iran, as the Trump administration accelerates its military campaign in a conflict that has killed hundreds, including at least six American service members.

The motion failed in a vote of 47-53.

In addition to pulling out military resources from the Middle East, the measure — introduced by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) — would have required Congress’ explicit approval before future engagement with Iran, a power granted to the legislative branch in the Constitution.

The House, where Republicans also hold an advantage, is scheduled to weigh in on a similar measure Thursday. Even if both Democratic-led measures were to succeed, President Trump was widely expected to veto the legislation.

“We are doing very well on the war front, to put it mildly,” President Trump said at a White House event on Wednesday afternoon. The president, who has come under scrutiny for offering shifting explanations on the war’s endgame, said that if he was asked to scale the American military operation from one to 10, he would rate it a 15.

Advertisement

Democrats dispute that Trump possesses the authority to wage the ongoing operation in Iran without explicit congressional approval.

Acknowledging the measure was unlikely to succeed, they framed the vote as a strategy to force lawmakers to put their support for or opposition to the war on record.

“Today every senator — every single one — will pick a side,” Schumer said. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East, or stand with Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth as they bumble us headfirst into another war?”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and most of his Republican colleagues have maintained that the president carried out a “pre-emptive” and “defensive” strike in Iran, giving him full authority to continue unilateral military operations.

Republicans saw the vote as the “last roadblock” stopping Trump from carrying out his mission against the Islamic Republic.

Advertisement

“I think the president has the authority that he needs to conduct the activities and operations that are currently underway there. There are a lot of controversy and questions around the war powers act, but I think the president is acting in the best interest of the nation and our national security interests,” Thune said at a news conference.

Senators largely held to party loyalties, with the exception of Kentucky Republican Rand Paul, who broke ranks to support the measure, and Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman, who opposed it.

The vote comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war against Iran is “accelerating,” with American and Israeli forces expanding air operations into Iranian territory. He pointed to evidence released by U.S. Central Command of a submarine strike on an Iranian warship, and also lauded other strikes throughout the region as civilian casualties in Iran surpassed 1,000 on the fourth day of the conflict, according to rights groups.

“We’re going to continue to do well,” Trump said Wednesday. “We have the greatest military in the world by far and that was a tremendous threat to us for many years. Forty-seven years they’ve been killing our people and killing people all over the world, and we have great support.”

Republicans blocked a similar war powers vote in January after the president ordered U.S. special forces to capture and extradite Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas on drug trafficking charges.

Advertisement

GOP leaders argued that the outcome of that mission equated to a quick success in the Middle East, despite an uncertain timeline from the Department of Defense.

In the House, lawmakers will vote on a separate war powers effort Thursday. That bill is led by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the two lawmakers who authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

“Instead of sending billions overseas, we need to invest in jobs, healthcare, and education here,” Khanna said on X.

In addition to that proposal, moderate Democrats in the House have introduced a separate resolution that would give the administration a 30-day window to justify continued hostilities in the Middle East before requiring a formal declaration of war or authorization from Congress.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending