Connect with us

California

California Democrats talked a big game on reparations. They're off to slow start

Published

on

California Democrats talked a big game on reparations. They're off to slow start


Gov. Gavin Newsom and California lawmakers in 2020 touted a law to create a “first in the nation” state task force to study and propose remedies to atone for the legacy of slavery.

Four years later, their work to deliver reparations is more incremental than recording-breaking, stoking frustration among advocates who filled the Capitol as lawmakers cast their final votes of the legislative session on Saturday.

Hamstrung by a state budget deficit and the challenges of supporting a politically volatile issue in an election year, the California Legislature passed a limited slate of reparations bills. The meager progress, though hailed by some lawmakers and advocates, in a state as liberal as California could serve as a warning on the issue to the rest of the nation.

Advertisement

“I think what it demonstrates is that when the rubber hits the road, Democrats are still unwilling and unable and uninterested in truly supporting these efforts outside of sort of symbolic and less than substantive ways,” said Tatishe Nteta, provost professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and director of the UMass poll.

The California Legislative Black Caucus announced 14 priority reparations bills in January based on recommendations made last year by the reparations task force. Lawmakers cast the legislation as a first step focused largely on enacting policy changes in education, healthcare and criminal justice, while omitting cash payments in light of the state’s financial troubles.

Lawmakers passed 10 bills in the package before they adjourned Saturday, including marquee legislation requiring a formal apology from the state for “perpetuating the harms African Americans faced by having imbued racial prejudice through segregation, public and private discrimination, and unequal disbursal of state and federal funding and [declaring] that such actions shall not be repeated.”

The Legislature placed a measure on the November ballot that asks voters to delete language in the California Constitution that allows involuntary servitude as a form of punishment for crimes. Another bill would end a work requirement for able-bodied state prisoners and instead develop a voluntary work program if the ballot measure banning involuntary servitude is approved.

Other bills establish a process for the state to review and investigate claims of racially motivated taking of property by governments using the power of eminent domain, seek to increase and track participation in career training education among Black and low-income students, and expand Medi-Cal coverage, pending federal approval, to include benefits for medically supported food and nutrition.

Advertisement

The legislation now on Newsom’s desk also includes new oversight of book bans in California prisons, a requirement that grocery stores and pharmacies give written notice at least 45 days before closing and the expansion of a state law prohibiting discrimination based on hairstyle to include youth sports.

Bills faltered in the Legislature that sought to restrict solitary confinement in prisons, to prioritize African American descendants of people who were enslaved in the United States for state licenses and to establish grants to fund local efforts to decrease violence in Black communities. A proposal to amend the state constitution to allow funding for programs that increase life expectancy, improve educational outcomes and alleviate poverty among certain racial and ethnic groups of people also failed.

Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson (D-Suisun City), who leads the Legislative Black Caucus, said that work on reparations will continue next year and that the successful bills marked an important first step.

“It was definitely intentional to start laying a foundation,” she said. “We look forward to building on top of that and being able to really engage the community on the work that we’re doing.”

Sen. Steven Bradford (D-Gardena), who introduced the bill to begin the process of reversing racially motivated land and property seizures in the reparations package, pushed two additional bills that failed when the Legislature refused to take them up for a final vote: to create a California American Freedmen Affairs Agency and to establish a Fund for Reparations and Reparative Justice to pay for and carry out reparations policies approved by lawmakers. Neither was included on the Black caucus’ priority list.

Advertisement

As the bills languished in the Assembly on Saturday, reparations advocates gathered in the Capitol Rotunda to lobby lawmakers.

“Bring the bills up!” they shouted every time an Assembly member emerged from the chamber.

Chris Lodgson, wearing a cap embroidered with the words “Cut the check,” said the bills that passed do not represent a meaningful change.

“An apology is not reparations. Extending the Crown Act [to prohibit discrimination against Black hairstyles], that’s not no damn reparations. Passing a bill so that people could read the books that they want to read, that’s not no damn reparations,” he said.

“The only bills to actually let us even do reparations are the bills that they’re scared to bring up.”

Advertisement

Bradford said the bills’ failure was the biggest disappointment of his 14-year career in the Legislature, which came to an end Saturday.

“I think this was the time to strike. The nation’s watching, and I think we owe it to not only African Americans here in California, but across this nation, to set a fine example,” he said. “I”m saddened by it.”

The legislation put forward by the Black caucus was based on recommendations from California’s reparations task force at the conclusion of a historic two-year process last summer to study the effects of slavery, to prove the ways in which government continues to discriminate against Black people and to suggest policy changes to state lawmakers.

The sweeping wish list of reforms included politically challenging proposals to provide cash payments, abolish the death penalty in California and offer free college tuition to eligible descendants, among dozens of other ideas.

Direct financial compensation has become a particularly fraught issue, one sought by activists but opposed by most of the general public.

Advertisement

Newsom, who signed the law that set the reparations movement in motion in California, has yet to endorse the notion of the state providing cash payments to descendants of African Americans who were enslaved. The governor, task force members and lawmakers have repeated the idea that reparations are about more than cash.

A UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll in 2023, co-sponsored by The Times, found that 59% of California voters oppose cash payments compared with 28% who support the idea. More than 4 in 10 voters “strongly” opposed cash payments.

A national UMass poll conducted in January found opposition to the federal government providing cash payments at 67%, compared with 34% who said it definitely or probably should pay descendants. Among those against the idea, 29% said their reason was because descendants do not deserve the money.

Nteta said California’s work to investigate and show evidence of the systemic ways in which racial identification has affected the Black community exceeds the federal government’s efforts to detail and trace the impact of slavery. But there’s an inherent tension between advocates who want to apply pressure to enact change now and legislators who recognize that pushing the unpopular idea too hard and failing could be “the death knell for reparations as a policy.”

The nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris, a Black woman and a Californian, as the Democratic presidential candidate adds another level of complexity to the politics of reparations.

Advertisement

Nteta said Republicans mobilize white voters, either directly or implicitly, by suggesting Democratic candidates will improve life for Black Americans and people of color in a way that adversely affects white people.

“When Harris starts to talk about reparations and define herself, there’s a high likelihood that will then be used as a means by which to run ads to demonstrate that she is going to, if elected, disproportionately support the African American community,” Nteta said. “So, her racial identity and her partisan identity intertwining is actually bad news for the notion of a potential president speaking about reparations, or even doing anything on reparations. There’s a lot of political backlash that is going to happen if this is something that she articulates an opinion on.”

Democrats, including those who support reparations, are also unlikely to push her to talk about a controversial subject if it could hurt her chances of beating former President Trump, he said. Harris supported the idea of studying the generational effect of discrimination and institutional racism in order to consider potential interventions before the Democratic primary in her failed bid for the presidency in the 2020 election.

Any action taken in the Golden State could also be pinned on Harris. Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, criticize her as a “left-leaning progressive Californian from San Francisco” to suggest she’s out of touch with America, Nteta said.

“The California Legislature passing a reparations bill would be just like manna from heaven for the Republican Party and for Donald Trump to demonstrate and make the case that this is what the future would look like under a president from California that cut her teeth in a state and has those overarching ideals,” Nteta said. “So it makes sense that there would be very few sort of revolutionary or extremely progressive policies that come out before the fall election.”

Advertisement



Source link

California

Opinion | California will make less money from greenhouse gas emission auctions

Published

on

Opinion | California will make less money from greenhouse gas emission auctions


By Dan Walters, CalMatters

The Phillips 66 refinery in Wilmington, on Sept. 30, 2025. Photo by Stella Kalinina for CalMatters

This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Two decades ago, when California got serious about reducing or even eliminating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, its political leaders weighed two potential tactics about industrial emissions.

Advertisement

The state could impose direct facility-by-facility limits, generally favored by climate change advocates. Or it could set overall emission reduction goals that would gradually decrease and auction off emission allowances, assuming their costs would encourage reductions.

The latter, known as cap-and-trade, was favored by corporate interests as being less onerous and was adopted, finally taking effect in 2012.

Since then, the California Air Resources Board has conducted quarterly auctions of emission allowances, collecting a total of $35 billion dollars so far, which, in theory, is being spent on projects that would reduce emissions.

The revenues have varied from year to year, but they have generally increased as the emission caps have declined. Since reaching a peak of $8.1 billion in the 2023-24 fiscal year, however, auction proceeds have been declining.

Roughly half of the money has been given to utilities to minimize cap-and-trade’s impact on consumer costs. However, the program has been widely criticized as a de facto tax on gasoline and other fuels, which were already among the most expensive of any state.

Advertisement

The remaining revenues have been deposited into a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund that governors and legislators have tapped for various purposes, not all of them connected to emission reductions. In a sense, it’s been a slush fund.

Last year Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature overhauled the program in two bills, Senate Bill 840 and Assembly Bill 1207. The program was extended, it was renamed as cap-and-invest and new priorities for spending auction proceeds were set.

Notably, the state’s cash-strapped and long-stalled bullet train project would get a flat $1 billion a year, rather than the 25% share it had been getting. Project managers hope that lenders will advance enough money to complete its first leg in the San Joacim Valley; the plan is to repay the loans from the $1 billion annual cap-and-invest allocation.

Early this year, the Air Resources Board released new regulations to implement the legislative changes but faced criticism that they would increase consumer costs. That led to a revision in April that softens the rules’ impact — most obviously on refiners who have been threatening to leave California — but environmental groups are very critical.

The April version would also sharply reduce net revenues from emission auctions, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, providing barely enough for the $1 billion allocation to the bullet train and another $1 billion for the governor and Legislature to spend. Other programs that have been receiving cap-and-invest support, such as wildfire protection and housing, would probably get nothing.

Advertisement

The program has been tapped in recent years to backfill programs that a deficit-ridden state budget could not cover, so the projected revenue drop would exacerbate efforts by Newsom and legislators to close the state budget’s yawning gap.

“The (Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund) is a relatively small portion of the overall state budget, but it has been a noteworthy source of funding for environmental and other programs in recent years,” the state Assembly’s budget advisor, Jason Sisney, says in an email. “Collapse of its revenues would change the state budget process noticeably. The state’s cost-pressured general fund seemingly would be unable to make up much, if any, of a significant (Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund) revenue decline at this time.”

When Newsom presents his revised budget this week, he may reveal how he intends to cover the cap-and-invest program’s shortfall, particularly whether he will maintain the $1 billion bullet train commitment that project leaders say is vital to continuing construction of its Merced-to-Bakersfield segment.

It could boil down to bullet train vs. wildfire protection.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Trump administration will defer $1.3B in Medicaid funds for CA

Published

on

Trump administration will defer .3B in Medicaid funds for CA


play

Vice President JD Vance announced on Wednesday, May 13 that the Trump administration will be deferring $1.3 billion in Medicaid reimbursements from the state of California, as part of a new initiative to root out fraud in federal health programs.

The topic of California’s hospice care fraud has been a major focus of scrutiny by state leadership, members of President Donald Trump’s administration, and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s critics. In his announcement, Vance claimed that the administration was set on deferring these funds “because the state of California has not taken fraud very seriously.”

Advertisement

“There are California taxpayers and American taxpayers who are being defrauded because California isn’t taking its program seriously,” Vance said during a press conference.

Notably, this decision was part of Vance’s Anti-Fraud Task Force’s plan to implement a six-month nationwide, data-driven moratorium on new Medicare enrollment for hospices and home health agencies.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which is led by Dr. Mehmet Oz, is set to use this six-month moratorium to conduct investigations and review data on Medicare programs, with the hopes of removing hospice and home health agencies that are suspected of committing fraud.

“Today we’re shutting the door on fraud — preventing new bad actors from entering Medicare while we aggressively identify, investigate, and remove those already exploiting them,” Oz said. “This is about protecting patients, restoring integrity, and safeguarding taxpayer dollars.”

Advertisement

California Attorney General Rob Bonta called the administration’s action “unlawful” and noted that his office would be “carefully reviewing all available information” and may challenge the administration’s decision to threaten “Californians’ rights or access to critical services.”

“Once again, California appears to be targeted solely for political reasons,” Bonta said on X.

“The Trump Administration is planning to defer over $1 billion in Medicaid funding for vital programs that help seniors and people with disabilities remain safely in their homes.”

Bonta and his office have attempted to counteract criticism that the state does not take action against hospice fraud.

Advertisement

In April, Bonta announced that the California Department of Justice had arrested five people in connection with a major health care scheme in Southern California that defrauded taxpayers of nearly a quarter of a billion dollars.

“For years, California has led the charge to protect public programs from fraud and abuse,” Newsom said in the press release on April 10. “We hold accountable to the fullest extent of the law anyone who tries to rip off taxpayers and take advantage of public programs, particularly those as sensitive as hospice care.”

Newsom has yet to publicly respond to the administration’s decision to defer California’s Medicaid reimbursement.

However, shortly after Vance made the announcement, Newsom’s press office blasted the decision on X.

Advertisement

“We hate fraud. But that’s NOT what this is,” Newsom’s press office posted on X. “Vance and Oz are attacking programs that keep seniors and people with disabilities OUT of nursing homes. Pretty sick.”

Noe Padilla is a Northern California Reporter for USA Today. Contact him at npadilla@usatodayco.com, follow him on X @1NoePadilla or on Bluesky @noepadilla.bsky.socialSign up for the TODAY Californian newsletter or follow us on Facebook at TODAY Californian.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

California girls’ track and field stars speak out as Gavin Newsom’s Title IX crisis grows

Published

on

California girls’ track and field stars speak out as Gavin Newsom’s Title IX crisis grows


Reese Hogan would have a very different set of medals if the rules were different in California.

It’s her third straight year competing against a trans athlete in the California girls’ track and field state tournament. She would have taken first place in the high jump all to herself in the sectional preliminaries last Saturday, if only biological females were allowed to compete.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM

Now she’ll compete against a trans athlete in the sectional finals this weekend, representing her Christian high school, Crean Lutheran. It will mark one year since she went viral on social media for stepping up from the second-place spot on a medal podium up to first place, after a trans athlete who took first place stepped off.

Advertisement

“This is my third year competing against a transgender athlete, and last year I was stripped away of a CIF Title, and I basically worked my whole career to get to that point,” Hogan said on “Fox News at Night” on Tuesday. “It’s just really dissapointing to go into a competition knowing you already lost.”

CALIFORNIA TRACK ATHLETE BRIEFLY POSES ON 1ST-PLACE PODIUM AFTER LOSING TO TRANS ATHLETE, RECEIVES PRAISE

Her Crean Lutheran teammate, Olivia Viola, has been right there with Hogan throughout the three years of competition against trans athletes.

“I haven’t heard nearly enough adults come out and say anything. A lot of them like to say that they agree with you, that they’re proud of you for speaking up now, but they won’t do it themselves,” Viola said. “Just because it doesn’t affect every adult out there doesn’t mean it’s not worth standing up for.”

California has legally allowed biological males to compete in girls’ sports since a state law was enacted in 2013. The state’s education agencies are engaged in a federal Title IX lawsuit with President Donald Trump’s administration for commitment to upholding that state law.

Advertisement

A source at Governor Gavin Newsom’s office previously provided a statement to Fox News Digital in response to news that a “Save Girls Sports” rally, which the two girls attended, would be held at last Saturday’s meet.

“The Governor has said discussions on this issue should be guided by fairness, dignity, and respect. He rejects the right wing’s cynical attempt to weaponize this debate as an excuse to vilify individual kids. The Governor’s position is simple: stand with all kids and stand up to bullies,” the statement read.

“California is one of 22 states that have laws requiring students be permitted to participate in sex-segregated school sports consistent with their gender identity. California passed this law in 2013 (AB 1266) and it was signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown.”

At the rally, Hogan spoke and fired back at Newsom’s office for the statement.

“The recent statements coming from Governor Gavin Newsom’s office have made it clear that there is no intention of creating a safe, fair, and equitable environment for female high school athletes. Him and his office have gone as far as calling young girls bullies for speaking up for what we believe in,” Hogan said.

Advertisement

“The governor himself has admitted that males competing in women’s sports is unfair, yet nothing is being done to protect girls who train every day to compete on a level playing field.”

CALIFORNIA ATHLETE SAYS SHE CHANGES CLOTHES IN HER CAR TO AVOID SHARING A LOCKER ROOM WITH TRANS ATHLETE

California high school girls wear “Protect Girls Sports” shirts at a postseason track meet at Yorba Linda High School on May 10, 2025. (Reese Hogan/Courtesy of Reese Hogan)

Viola also rejected the “bully” assertion in Tuesday’s interview.

“I think his statement is manipulative, and it’s just completely untrue,” Viola said. “He’s saying stand up for all kids, yet he’s essentially trying to silence us… these girls are not bullies. They make a point, we all make an point to say we are not against any individual athlete, we are against California’s policies,” Viola said.

Advertisement

“We believe athletes deserve dignity and respect, and that’s why we believe women deserve the dignity of having their own category.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Crean Lutheran High School senior track and field star Reese Hogan speaks at a ‘Save Girls Sports’ rally. (Courtesy of Alyssa Cruz)

Both Viola and Hogan will compete at the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) Southern Section Final on Saturday in Moorpark, California.

And just like last year, there will be a podium ceremony after the competitions.

Advertisement

Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending