Connect with us

Politics

Column: We hold these truths to be self-evident — the Golden State is still golden. And yes, we are Americans

Published

on

Column: We hold these truths to be self-evident — the Golden State is still golden. And yes, we are Americans

California has been a beacon, a destination, a paradise and promised land ever since its headlong expansion in a rush of gold fever.

It’s also been a perennial source of envy, mockery and contempt.

That naysaying has gained much greater currency in recent years as California’s population has contracted for the first time in more than a century.

The “exodus” has become an industry, stoking real estate markets from Nevada to Tennessee, fanning the red-versus-blue political flames and launching a thousand what-went-wrong analyses.

Advertisement

The latest insult — or bracing reality check? — came last week in a Los Angeles Times poll that found 50% of adults nationwide believe California is in decline. (Bummer, man.)

Nearly half the Republicans surveyed said the state is “not really American.” Whatever that means.

L.A. Times columnists Mark Z. Barabak (a proud California native) and Anita Chabria (a happy Ohio transplant) discuss the poll, the hating by haters and the state of their troubled but still much-loved state.

Barabak: So first off, Anita, are you OK? You haven’t choked to death on the noxious air pollution, or been run over by some smash-and-grab robber making a getaway through your pothole-filled neighborhood?

Chabria: To paraphrase Mark Twain, reports of our death are greatly exaggerated — again. The Golden State remains alive, kicking and, dare I say it, a thriving part of the United States.

Advertisement

But I am troubled that nearly 30% of respondents agreed with the statement that California is “not really American.” Nearly half of Republicans thought that, which is less shocking. But inexplicably, 21% of Californians did, too. That’s more than just the Fox crowd regurgitating the right-wing narrative of California as the spawning ground of social evils.

People, we joined the union in 1850 — ahead of Kansas, West Virginia and Nebraska to name a few. We’ve been American longer than many of the so-called heartland states. I’ve been puzzled for days over whether a third of America is terrible at geography, or history — or if they think it’s some sort of dig at California.

What do you think, Mark? Are we in fact not American in some fundamental way I don’t understand?

Barabak: I suppose it depends how you define American.

If you’re talking about a certain kind of America — one that is overwhelmingly white and conservative in its social, political and cultural values — than, no, California fails to measure up to that, er, standard.

Advertisement

We’ve been a majority-minority state now for more than a generation. Politically, the state has leaned strongly Democratic for decades, after supporting Republicans for much of our history.

Culturally, we’ve always tended toward broadmindedness — or being overly permissive, in the eyes of critics. Fresh starts and reinvention have been a lure since the first gold seekers — the ones digging actual nuggets — flocked here from the more straitened and class-conscious East Coast.

As you suggest, it’s not just Fox News. There are plenty of alienated Californians — the state has more than 5 million registered Republicans, which exceeds the population of many states — who feel overlooked in Sacramento and looked down upon by the supposed sophisticates in San Francisco and Los Angeles. That probably accounts for the 21% that had you scratching your head.

But to be clear, a lot of folks interviewed in the poll are obviously viewing California through a partisan lens. Or, perhaps it should be said, while wearing a thick set of blinders.

I mean, 3 in 10 Republicans said the state has a worse natural environment than other states. Really? Go shout that from the top of Yosemite Falls. Or in Santa Barbara at sunset. Or on a sunny winter day in Joshua Tree National Park, as folks in the Midwest thaw their snow shovels so they can dig their cars out of the drifts.

Advertisement

That said, we’ve got plenty of problems, no?

Chabria: Every place does and, of course, we are no exception.

The survey highlighted one problem most of us agree on: The cost of living in California is too high. More than 80% of California residents felt that way, and it’s no shock.

I’d venture to guess that has a lot to do with the price of housing. People can’t afford rent, which leads to a whole host of other problems — including older people being forced into homelessness.

I genuinely believe that California’s future depends on finding a way to build massive amounts of new housing, not just a few units here and there. We need the mental health beds promised by Proposition 1 on the March ballot and to find ways to create more affordable homes for the broad swath of middle-class Californians.

Advertisement

And that’s just for starters.

But the survey also pointed out that the majority of Californians, including myself, are happy living here.

So the Huntington Beach City Council can rant all they want, and the haters can hate. California will always stand for diversity, freedom and tolerance — all values that sadly seem to be growing scarcer east of the Sierra.

Where do you see the bright spots, Mark?

Barabak: Apart from its unsurpassed physical beauty, California is still a place that attracts innovators and entrepreneurs. It’s still a harbor for the politically persecuted and those who feel unwanted or unwelcome living elsewhere as their genuine selves.

Advertisement

Yes, our sales and income taxes are high compared to some other places. Housing, as you suggested, is obscenely expensive and we desperately need more of it.

But check out life in other cheaper, supposedly better places. Look into the cost of insurance in Florida. Get nickel and dimed every few miles on toll roads back East. Sweat your way through a summer in Texas and hope the power grid — and your air conditioning — doesn’t go out.

Sure, our government regulates with a heavier hand than elsewhere, and it’s not hard to find examples of excess. But isn’t it nice, for instance, to breathe clean air and be spared the teary eyes and clenched chest that smog-suffocated folks in Southern California experienced not so many decades ago?

Speaking of seeing through the gloom, here’s one heartening finding in that otherwise dismal poll: The attitude of young people.

Seven in 10 of those ages 18-34 see California as a trendsetter and, at 43% of respondents, were twice as likely as other Americans to say they would consider moving to the state. They believe California’s future is bright. Me, too.

Advertisement

I’ve moved around a lot, including the obligatory stint — for a political hack like me — in Washington, D.C. I thought I’d spent my career covering our nation’s capital, but lasted just seven years. Like Dorothy, who went all the way to Oz to know she really wanted to be in Kansas, California tugged at me the whole time I was away.

For all the state’s difficulties — or challenges, if you prefer — I can’t imagine ever living any place else. California resides deep in my heart.

How about you?

Chabria: I love California.

As a mixed-race woman with mixed-race kids, I value its tolerance and diversity. I value its willingness to fight and lead at this critical time when democracy is fragile. I value that it’s truly a live-and-let-live kind of place, even when people don’t agree.

Advertisement

To me, the poll results say less about life in California than the sad effectiveness of right-wing political propaganda and the power of fearmongering over truth. MAGA needs California to be a villain, to represent the supposed failures of the Democratic Party, especially around crime and immigration, and reality be damned.

If no one else wants them, we’ll take the tired and poor, the huddled masses. California always has and always will embody the American dream, that each of us matters and each of us belongs.

That respect for equity and equality is what makes us the Golden State.

Advertisement

Politics

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

Published

on

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

new video loaded: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

transcript

transcript

President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

“The fact that you can’t admit to a mistake which looks like under investigation is going to prove that Ms. Good and Mr. Pretti probably should not have been shot in the face and in the back. Law enforcement needs to learn from that. You don’t protect them by not looking after the facts.” “Our greatness calls people to us for a chance to prosper, to live how they choose, to become part of something special. Anyone who searches for freedom can always find a home here. But that freedom is a precious thing, and we defend it vigorously. You crossed the border illegally — we’ll find you. Break our laws — we’ll punish you.” “Did you bid out those service contracts?” “Yes they did. They went out to a competitive bid.” “I’m asking you — sorry to interrupt — but the president approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV ads across the country in which you are featured prominently?” “Yes, sir. We went through the legal processes. Did it correctly —” Did the president know you were going to do this?” “Yes.” “I’m more excited about just ready to get started. There’s a lot of work we can do to get the Department of Homeland Security working for the American people.”

Advertisement
President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

By Jackeline Luna

March 5, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

DOJ continues Biden autopen probe despite former president unlikely to face charges

Published

on

DOJ continues Biden autopen probe despite former president unlikely to face charges

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is continuing its investigation into former President Joe Biden’s use of an autopen in the final months of his administration — focusing on pardons and commutations — though a senior official said Biden is unlikely to face criminal exposure.

A senior DOJ official told Fox News the autopen investigation is ongoing and not closed, adding investigators are reviewing clemency actions taken in the final months of the Biden administration.

The official also pointed out, however, that the use of an autopen by a sitting president is “established law.”

The issue under review is whether the autopen was used in violation of the law, specifically, whether Biden personally approved each name included on pardon and commutation lists.

Advertisement

A framed portrait shows former President Joe Biden’s signature and an autopen along “The Presidential Walk of Fame” outside the Oval Office of the White House.  (Andrew Harnick/Getty Images)

“These types of cases are tough. Executive privilege issues come into play,” the official said.

What is also clear, the official indicated, is that the target of any potential prosecution would not likely be Biden.

“It’s hard to imagine how [Biden] could be criminally liable for pardon power,” the senior DOJ official said.

BIDEN’S AUTOPEN PARDONS DISTURBED DOJ BRASS, DOCS SHOW, RAISING QUESTIONS WHETHER THEY ARE LEGALLY BINDING

Advertisement

The use of the autopen by former President Joe Biden remains under investigation. (AP Photo)

The official noted that one reason the former president would be unlikely to face charges stems from a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that originally involved current President Donald Trump but would also apply to Biden.

“We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office,” the Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. United States in 2024. 

“At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute.”

Sources familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital that U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s team continues to review the Biden White House’s reliance on an autopen, contradicting a recent New York Times report that indicated the investigation had been paused.

Advertisement

DOJ SIGNALS IT’S STILL DIGGING INTO BIDEN AUTOPEN USE DESPITE REPORTS PROBE FIZZLED

President Donald Trump has pushed for consequences for former President Joe Biden’s alleged use of the autopen. (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo)

Trump has pushed for consequences over the autopen controversy, alleging on social media that aides acted unlawfully in its use and raising the prospect of perjury charges against Biden.

Biden has rejected those claims, saying in a statement last year he personally directed the decisions in question.

“Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency,” Biden said. “I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn’t is ridiculous and false.”

Advertisement

The House Oversight Committee has homed in on Biden’s clemency actions, including five controversial pardons for family members in the final days of his presidency, citing what it described as a lack of “contemporaneous documentation” confirming that Biden directly ordered the pardons.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The committee asked the DOJ to investigate “all of former President Biden’s executive actions, particularly clemency actions, to assess whether legal action must be taken to void any action that the former president did not, in fact, take himself.”

Fox News Digital’s Ashley Oliver contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Related Article

Top Biden officials questioned and criticized how his team issued pardons, used autopen: report
Continue Reading

Politics

Anxiety grows among California Democrats as gubernatorial candidates rebuff calls to drop out

Published

on

Anxiety grows among California Democrats as gubernatorial candidates rebuff calls to drop out

Despite a plea from the head of the California Democratic Party for underperforming candidates to drop out of the governor’s race, all but one of the party’s top hopefuls spurned the request.

Party leaders fear the growing possibility that the crowded field will split the Democratic electorate in the state’s June top-two primary election and result in two Republicans advancing to the November ballot, ensuring a Republican governor being elected for the first time since 2006.

His advice largely unheeded, state party Chairman Rusty Hicks on Thursday said the fate of a Democratic victory now rests squarely on the gubernatorial candidates who flouted him.

“The candidates for Governor now have a chance to showcase a viable path to win,” Hicks said in a statement Thursday.

Eight top Democratic candidates filed the official paperwork to appear on the June ballot after Hicks released a letter on Tuesday urging those “who cannot show meaningful progress towards winning” to drop out. Friday is the deadline to file to appear on the primary election ballot. On March 21, the secretary of state’s office will formally announce who will appear on the June ballot.

Advertisement

“It sounded like someone who has his head in the sand,” former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said of Hicks’ open letter. “[Most] of us filed within 24 hours of getting that letter. It created some press but not much else. It didn’t impact [most] of the candidates and it certainly didn’t impact my candidacy.”

Democratic strategist Elizabeth Ashford said it was appropriate for Hicks and other Democratic leaders to make a public plea as opposed to keeping such discussions solely behind closed doors.

But the response showed the limited power of the modern-day party bosses.

“It’s definitely not Tammany Hall,” said Ashford, referring to the storied Democratic political machine that had a grip on New York City politics for nearly a century. “The party and Rusty are influential and they are helpful and that is their role. I don’t think anyone would be comfortable with outright public strong-arming of specific candidates.”

Ashford, who worked for former Govs. Jerry Brown and Arnold Schwarzenegger, along with former Vice President Kamala Harris when she served as state attorney general, added that the minimal power of the state GOP is likely a factor in the dynamics of Democrats’ decision to stay in the race. Democratic registered voters outnumber Republicans by almost a 2-to-1 margin in the state, and Democrats control every statewide elected office and hold supermajorities in both chambers of the California Legislature.

Advertisement

“If there were a strong viable opposition that existed, if the Republican Party was actually relevant in California, I think that would sort of force greater unity amongst Democrats,” she said.

Just one of the nine major Democrats did heed the party chair’s message. Ian Calderon, a former Los Angeles-area Assemblyman who consistently polled near the bottom of the field, withdrew from the race and endorsed Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin) on Thursday.

Candidates cannot withdraw their name from the ballot once they officially file to run for office, leading to some fears that even if other candidates drop out of the race, a crowded primary ballot could still split California’s liberal votes.

“I’m disappointed most of them will be on the ballot,” said Lorena Gonzalez, the head of the California Federation of Labor Unions, which will announce whether it endorses in the governor’s race on March 16. But “I do still think you can have people drop out of the race or become viable. I think that there are candidates who know viability is a real thing they have to show in coming weeks” before ballots start being mailed to voters.

Jodi Hicks, chief executive and president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, said she is “still worried” about the prospect of two Republicans winning the top two spots in the June primary, shutting Democrats out of any chance of winning the governor’s office in November.

Advertisement

“I didn’t have any specifics of who I wanted to do what,” she said. “I’m just very, very concerned and the stakes are really high right now and seem to be getting worse by the day.”

Republican candidate Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host, said he is “confident that I’ll be in the top two” along with a Democratic candidate. “I find it very difficult to believe that the Democratic Party will just surrender California and allow two Republicans to be in the top two.”

Hilton made the comments Thursday after a gubernatorial forum in Sacramento hosted by the California Assn. of Realtors focused on housing and homeownership. Villaraigosa, former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan and former Rep. Katie Porter also attended. Swalwell, who is currently in Washington, joined the panel virtually.

During the panel, candidates were in broad agreement about the need to reduce barriers and costs in order to build more housing in California, where the median single-family home costs more than $820,000. Many also endorsed proposals to disincentivize private investment firms from buying up homes as well as a $25-billion bond proposed by former Sen. Bob Hertzberg to help first-time homebuyers afford a down payment.

“This really isn’t a debate because we’re agreeing so much with each other,” Hilton said at one point during the event.

Advertisement

That political alignment on one of the most pressing issues facing California may explain why voters are having such a difficult time deciding who to support.

A recent poll of the Public Policy Institute of California found that the five candidates topping the crowded field were within 4 percentage points of one another: Porter, Swalwell, Hilton, Democratic hedge fund founder Tom Steyer and Republican Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco. Earlier polls had Hilton and Bianco leading the field, though many voters remained undecided.

Some candidates took issue with Hicks’ push to cull the field, noting that most of the lower-polling candidates he asked to drop out are people of color.

“Our political system is rigged, corrupted by the political elites, the wealthy and well connected,” state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, who is Black and Latino, said in a video posted on social media in response to the open letter. “The California Democratic Party is essentially telling every person of color in the race for Governor to drop out.”

Villaraigosa argued that enough voters remain undecided that it was too early for quality candidates to call it quits.

Advertisement

“Most people don’t even know who’s in the race,” said Villaraigosa. “It’s premature to be thinking about getting out of the race. I certainly am not considering it and I feel no pressure.”

Aside from the opinion polls, other indicators on who may emerge from the pack a candidates are slowly emerging.

Though it wasn’t enough to win the party’s endorsement, Swalwell won support from 24% of delegates at the state Democratic convention last month, the most of any party candidate.

While spending is no guarantee of success, Steyer has donated $47.4 million of his own wealth to his campaign. Mahan, who recently entered the race and is supported by Silicon Valley leaders, has quickly raised millions of dollars, as have two independent expenditures committees backing his bid.

Ashford said part of candidates’ decisions to remain in the race could have been driven by their lengthy political careers, as well as Democrats’ crushing November redistricting victory.

Advertisement

“In several cases, these are people who have won statewide office,” she said. “It’s tough to feel like there may not be a sequel to that.”

Nixon reported from Sacramento and Mehta from Los Angeles.

Continue Reading

Trending