California
As Newsom urges refinery controls, California regulators consider hike in gas prices
As Gov. Gavin Newsom wages a high-profile campaign to prevent sudden spikes in gasoline prices, California air regulators are quietly pushing through a policy change of their own that could raise pump prices by almost a half-dollar a gallon or more.
Newsom recently called a special legislative session to consider controversial new controls on state oil refineries, and the California Air Resources Board — the state agency tasked with regulating planet-warming emissions — soon will consider stricter limits on the carbon intensity of fuels.
In September of last year, CARB estimated that the change could lift gasoline prices 47 cents a gallon, or $6.4 billion a year.
Other analysts put the price even higher — 65 cents a gallon, or $8.8 million a year.
Now, as CARB nears a November vote on its low carbon fuel standard, or LCFS, the agency is backing away from its price hike forecast. Recently, an air board official told legislators that the 47-cents-a-gallon estimate was just a “snapshot” based on a forecasting model that “can never capture real world conditions.” However, the agency has refused to offer a revised estimate to the public.
Legislators from both parties are now voicing frustration over what they say is CARB’s troubling lack of transparency.
Some legislators are questioning whether the air board has become too powerful and requires more oversight from elected officials.
“For me, this special session has been about ensuring that gas prices are going down,” said Assemblymember Corey Jackson (D-Perris). “And certainly, if CARB is creating regulations that will increase gas prices, we’re going to have to take a look at that and see if we have to rein in their authority.”
What concerns him most, Jackson said, is the board’s resistance to acknowledging the consumer costs of its forthcoming policies. “The increased quality of our air may be worth higher prices,” he said, but he doesn’t understand how keeping forecasts under wraps encourages public debate over government policy.
Assemblymember Joe Patterson (R-Rocklin) shares Jackson’s concern. “Maybe the cost is worth it because we’ll have cleaner air,” he said. “But how do you make informed decisions if you don’t want to know about all the possible outcomes?”
He also questioned the timing of the special session. “It just feels like the governor is more concerned about sticking it to the oil companies than he is about the actual costs of gasoline.”
Assemblymember Blanca Rubio (D-Baldwin Park) was traveling and unavailable for an interview, but emailed the following: “While the Legislature is currently working to address petroleum price spikes through the public process, it is unfortunate CARB is unwilling to provide an estimate of the monetary impacts amendments to the LCFS will have. This process is intended to be public and collaborative, but the Legislature will struggle to make significant positive impacts to fuel prices if CARB is unwilling to address the role their regulations play in determining prices.”
The air board’s November vote centers on amendments to the LCFS, a carbon market program that took effect in 2011. The program penalizes refineries that make high carbon fuel, such as diesel and gasoline, and benefits makers of lower carbon fuels such as renewable diesel.
The amendents would impose far stricter limits on the carbon intensity of fuels, leading to far higher costs for refineries to buy credits to comply with the law. Extra costs are passed through to consumers at the pump. But the air board won’t will talk about how much that might be.
CARB chief Steven Cliff says the agency won’t be forecasting the effects of climate policy on gasoline prices.
(Associated Press)
CARB’s chief, Steven Cliff, told The Times that no new numbers will be forthcoming because “what we are not equipped to do is analyze what the effect would be on retail gasoline prices.” Instead, “we look at all the economic impacts” including economic growth, job creation and public health.
On that basis, Cliff said, the amendments are a net positive for Californians.
Asked whether estimating fuel costs and releasing the figures might help inform public policy, Cliff said: “We put out the analysis that is mandated by law.”
CARB critics believe fuel price transparency is required so lawmakers can weigh climate policy trade-offs and ultimately answer to their constituents.
It’s not only legislators who are concerned about CARB’s approach, however.
Danny Cullenward is a carbon markets expert and vice chair of California’s Independent Emissions Market Advisory Committee. He’s the analyst that used data also available to the air board to come up with his estimate of per-gallon costs up to 65 cents in the near term and possibly much higher in the long term for policies under the air board’s consideration.
Cullenward said CARB needs to release more information, and that the air board in November will be making an “opaque regulatory decision that will take place three days after the election,” when media attention will be elsewhere.
On Monday, Cullenward released a paper written for the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania on the fuel standards issue. “Rather than discuss these implications openly, the regulator has distanced itself from its own initial assessment of costs,” he wrote.
Cullenward is considered a champion of carbon reduction, but sometimes takes flak when he questions the efficacy of some carbon market programs. The air board’s fuel standards policies, he believes, favor lower-carbon biofuels over far cleaner electrification of transportation.
He’s not surprised that the Legislature is suddenly paying more attention to CARB. Although the fuels program “is regularly reviewed and updated every few years, it has not been guided by specific legislation since implementation — despite its evolution into a multi-billion-dollar market with substantial environmental and economic consequences,” he wrote in his paper.
That could change.
“I think you’re going to start seeing a greater discussion about our willingness to give our authority to CARB’s executives, and even rein in the powers we’ve given away in the past,” said Jackson, the assembly member.
California
Up to 20 billionaires may leave California over tax threat | Fox Business Video
California Congressman Darrell Issa discusses reports that as many as 20 billionaires could leave the state amid concerns over a proposed new wealth tax which critics say is driving high-net-worth taxpayers out of California on ‘The Evening Edit.’
California
California’s exodus isn’t just billionaires — it’s regular people renting U-Hauls, too
It isn’t just billionaires leaving California.
Anecdotal data suggest there is also an exodus of regular people who load their belongings into rental trucks and lug them to another state.
U-Haul’s survey of the more than 2.5 million one-way trips using its vehicles in the U.S. last year showed that the gap between the number of people leaving and the number arriving was higher in California than in any other state.
While the Golden State also attracts a large number of newcomers, it has had the biggest net outflow for six years in a row.
Generally, the defectors don’t go far. The top five destinations for the diaspora using U-Haul’s trucks, trailers and boxes last year were Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and Texas.
California experienced a net outflow of U-Haul users with an in-migration of 49.4%, and those leaving of 50.6%. Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey and Illinois also rank among the bottom five on the index.
U-Haul didn’t speculate on the reasons California continues to top the ranking.
“We continue to find that life circumstances — marriage, children, a death in the family, college, jobs and other events — dictate the need for most moves,” John Taylor, U-Haul International president, said in a press statement.
While California’s exodus was greater than any other state, the silver lining was that the state lost fewer residents to out-of-state migration in 2025 than in 2024.
U-Haul said that broadly the hotly debated issue of blue-to-red state migration, which became more pronounced after the pandemic of 2020, continues to be a discernible trend.
Though U-Haul did not specify the reasons for the exodus, California demographers tracking the trend point to the cost of living and housing affordability as the top reasons for leaving.
“Over the last dozen years or so, on a net basis, the flow out of the state because of housing [affordability] far exceeds other reasons people cite [including] jobs or family,” said Hans Johnson, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California.
“This net out migration from California is a more than two-decade-long trend. And again, we’re a big state, so the net out numbers are big,” he said.
U-Haul data showed that there was a pretty even split between arrivals and departures. While the company declined to share absolute numbers, it said that 50.6% of its one-way customers in California were leaving, while 49.4% were arriving.
U-Haul’s network of 24,000 rental locations across the U.S. provides a near-real-time view of domestic migration dynamics, while official data on population movements often lags.
California’s population grew by a marginal 0.05% in the year ending July 2025, reaching 39.5 million people, according to the California Department of Finance.
After two consecutive years of population decline following the 2020 pandemic, California recorded its third year of population growth in 2025. While international migration has rebounded, the number of California residents moving out increased to 216,000, consistent with levels in 2018 and 2019.
Eric McGhee, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, who researches the challenges facing California, said there’s growing evidence of political leanings shaping the state’s migration patterns, with those moving out of state more likely to be Republican and those moving in likely to be Democratic.
“Partisanship probably is not the most significant of these considerations, but it may be just the last straw that broke the camel’s back, on top of the other things that are more traditional drivers of migration … cost of living and family and friends and jobs,” McGhee said.
Living in California costs 12.6% more than the national average, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. One of the biggest pain points in the state is housing, which is 57.8% more expensive than what the average American pays.
The U-Haul study across all 50 states found that 7 of the top 10 growth states where people moved to have Republican governors. Nine of the states with the biggest net outflows had Democrat governors.
Texas, Florida and North Carolina were the top three growth states for U-Haul customers, with Dallas, Houston and Austin bagging the top spots for growth in metro regions.
A notable exception in California was San Diego and San Francisco, which were the only California cities in the top 25 metros with a net inflow of one-way U-Haul customers.
California
California loses $160M for delaying revocation of 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses for immigrants
California will lose $160 million for delaying the revocations of 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses for immigrants, federal transportation officials announced Wednesday.
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy already withheld $40 million in federal funding because he said California isn’t enforcing English proficiency requirements for truckers.
The state notified these drivers in the fall that they would lose their licenses after a federal audit found problems that included licenses for truckers and bus drivers that remained valid long after an immigrant’s visa expired. Some licenses were also given to citizens of Mexico and Canada who don’t qualify. More than one-quarter of the small sample of California licenses that investigators reviewed were unlawful.
But then last week California said it would delay those revocations until March after immigrant groups sued the state because of concerns that some groups were being unfairly targeted. Duffy said the state was supposed to revoke those licenses by Monday.
Duffy is pressuring California and other states to make sure immigrants who are in the country illegally aren’t granted the licenses.
“Our demands were simple: follow the rules, revoke the unlawfully-issued licenses to dangerous foreign drivers, and fix the system so this never happens again,” Duffy said in a written statement. “(Gov.) Gavin Newsom has failed to do so — putting the needs of illegal immigrants over the safety of the American people.”
Newsom’s office did not immediately respond after the action was announced Wednesday afternoon.
After Duffy objected to the delay in revocations, Newsom posted on X that the state believed federal officials were open to a delay after a meeting on Dec. 18. But in the official letter the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration sent Wednesday, federal officials said they never agreed to the delay and still expected the 17,000 licenses to be revoked by this week.
Enforcement ramped up after fatal crashes
The federal government began cracking down during the summer. The issue became prominent after a truck driver who was not authorized to be in the U.S. made an illegal U-turn and caused a crash in Florida that killed three people in August.
Duffy previously threatened to withhold millions of dollars in federal funding from California, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, New York, Texas, South Dakota, Colorado, and Washington after audits found significant problems under the existing rules, including commercial licenses being valid long after an immigrant truck driver’s work permit expired. He had dropped the threat to withhold nearly $160 million from California after the state said it would revoke the licenses.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Administrator Derek Barrs said California failed to live up to the promise it made in November to revoke all the flawed licenses by Jan. 5. The agency said the state also unilaterally decide to delay until March the cancellations of roughly 4,700 additional unlawful licenses that were discovered after the initial ones were found.
“We will not accept a corrective plan that knowingly leaves thousands of drivers holding noncompliant licenses behind the wheel of 80,000-pound trucks in open defiance of federal safety regulations,” Barrs said.
Industry praises the enforcement
Trucking trade groups have praised the effort to get unqualified drivers who shouldn’t have licenses or can’t speak English off the road. They also applauded the Transportation Department’s moves to go after questionable commercial driver’s license schools.
“For too long, loopholes in this program have allowed unqualified drivers onto our highways, putting professional truckers and the motoring public at risk,” said Todd Spencer, president of the Owner Operator Independent Drivers Association.
The spotlight has been on Sikh truckers because the driver in the Florida crash and the driver in another fatal crash in California in October are both Sikhs. So the Sikh Coalition, a national group defending the civil rights of Sikhs, and the San Francisco-based Asian Law Caucus filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of the California drivers. They said immigrant truck drivers were being unfairly targeted.
Immigrants account for about 20% of all truck drivers, but these non-domiciled licenses immigrants can receive only represent about 5% of all commercial driver’s licenses or about 200,000 drivers. The Transportation Department also proposed new restrictions that would severely limit which noncitizens could get a license, but a court put the new rules on hold.
-
Detroit, MI5 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology3 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX4 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Health5 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska2 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
-
Iowa3 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Nebraska3 days agoNebraska-based pizza chain Godfather’s Pizza is set to open a new location in Queen Creek
-
Entertainment2 days agoSpotify digs in on podcasts with new Hollywood studios