For California, the 2018 wildfire season marked the “deadliest and most destructive” one on record, fire officials say. But then-President Donald Trump reportedly nearly declined to approve federal aid because of the state’s political makeup.

Trump changed his mind, however, after he was shown voter registration data from Orange County where Republicans then had an edge over Democrats, Politico reported.

In a phone call Thursday, Mark Harvey, who served as a special assistant to the president for matters related to domestic crisis at the time, confirmed to the Southern California News Group the exchange reported by Politico. The former National Security Council employee is among the more than 100 former Republican national security officials who have backed Vice President Kamala Harris in this election.

In all, nearly 2 million acres burned in California in 2018 and 100 people died, according to Cal Fire. While Northern California was impacted the most, Southern California was hit with the Holy fire in August of that year, burning more than 23,000 acres in Orange and Riverside counties and destroying homes and cabins.

“We went as far as looking up how many votes he got in those impacted areas … to show him these are people who voted for you,” Harvey told Politico.

In October 2018, 541,665 people (34.72%) in Orange County were registered Republican voters, 523,624 (33.56%) were registered Democrats and 429,675 (27.54%) were no party preference. Statewide, however, nearly 8.6 million (43.45%) registered voters in 2018 were Democrats, 5.4 million (27.52%) no party preference and 4.7 million (24.04%) were Republicans.

As of Sept. 6, registered Democrats outnumber Republicans in Orange County, 37.03% to 33.99%, with 22.77% of voters registered as no party preference. Southern California, and Orange County particularly, is home to multiple tight congressional races this year that will determine which political party controls the House in 2025.

A campaign spokesperson for Trump did not respond to a request for comment Thursday.

Trump has been highly critical of California and its handling of wildfires in 2018.

“I think California ought to get their act together and clean up their forests and manage their forests because it’s disgraceful,” Trump said during an August 2018 Cabinet meeting.

“So I say to the governor or whoever is going to be the governor of California: You better get your act together,” Trump said. “Because California, we’re just not going to continue to pay the kind of money that we’re paying because of fires that should never be to the extent …”

The Washington Post in 2018 reported that the then-president’s response to disasters was “colored in red and blue,” comparing his trips to the Gulf Coast and North Carolina after hurricanes to his criticism of California post wildfires. The report noted that Trump took to social media to criticize what he called California’s “gross mismanagement of the forests,” only acknowledging the victims 14 hours later.

After initially angering California officials with his social media response to the fires, Trump ultimately approved an expedited disaster declaration request.

Rep. Katie Porter, D-Irvine, called the report about Trump’s initial leanings on disaster relief for California “abhorrent.”

“When Orange County needed help, Donald Trump left us to fend for ourselves,” Porter said on X, formerly Twitter. “Our leaders should look out for every person they represent, not just the people who voted for them.”

In recent days, Trump has repeatedly criticized the Biden administration, including Harris, for its handling of the destruction in the southeast caused by Hurricane Helene.

He has said, without evidence, that the Biden administration and Democratic officials were not helping people in Republican areas. At a rally in Michigan on Thursday, he claimed that the administration had no money to deal with the disaster because it had spent too much on migrants.

President Joe Biden and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, both Democrats, lambasted Trump on Thursday.

“You can’t only help those in need if they voted for you,” Biden said on X. “It’s the most basic part of being president, and this guy knows nothing about it.”

“A glimpse into the future if we elect (Trump),” said an X post from Newsom.

Last month, Trump was critical of both the state and federal governments for their handling of the reactivation of an ancient landslide complex on the Palos Verdes Penninsula. Speaking to reporters from his golf course on the cliffs of Ranchos Palos Verdes, Trump said officials were “missing in action” and called California a “mess.”

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California wants to help end the everyday household debate over whether the food in the fridge is still good to eat.

Food labels that say “sell by” or “best before” are misleading because they have no universal meaning under current laws. Now California wants to crack down on such practices, bidding to help consumers stop playing guessing games with produce and other items in their fridges.

The state is the first to ban food labels such as “sell by” or “best before” under a law signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The legislation signed by Newsom over the weekend aims at reducing both food waste and the state’s climate-warming emissions.

There are more than 50 different date labels on packaged food sold in stores, but the information is largely unregulated and does not relate to food safety. “Sell by” dates, for example, often act as a guide for stores to pull products from the shelf and not as an indicator of whether the product is still safe to consume.

With no federal regulations dictating what information these labels should include, the stamps have led to consumer confusion – and nearly 20% of the nation’s food waste, according to the Food and Drug Administration. In California, that’s about 6 million tons of unexpired food that’s tossed in the trash each year.

“Having to wonder whether our food is still good is an issue that we all have struggled with,” said Democratic Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, author of the bill.

The new law “is a monumental step to keep money in the pockets of consumers while helping the environment and the planet,” she added in her statement.

The law is set to take effect in July 2026, establishing a new standard for food labeling in California. It will require the use of “Best if Used By” label to signal peak quality and “Use By” label for product safety, an approach recommended by federal agencies. The law provides exemption for eggs, beer and other malt beverages.

The California law comes as similar efforts around the country remain halted at the federal level. State lawmakers and advocates said they also spent the last decade trying to pass legislation to reduce food labeling confusion and cut down on food waste. A similar measure died before reaching the governor’s desk in 2016. Then-Gov. Jerry Brown also signed a bill in 2017 to establish voluntary uniform-labeling protocol but few companies ended up following the honor system.

“Widespread implementation that was basically committed to by industry wasn’t happening,” said Erica Parker with Californians Against Waste, who sponsored the bill. “Food waste rates are not decreasing, they’re increasing.”

Supporters hope the legislation could pave the way for new food labeling standards in the U.S., though it’s not immediately clear if the new law and the massive California market will push companies to standardize food labeling for all products in the country.

“California has such a large market share that we do think this will push manufacturers,” said Nina Sevilla with Natural Resources Defense Council, who also sponsored the bill. “The hope is that California serves as a model either for other states or ultimately to push action at the federal level.”

Shopper Jasmine Acosta, 23, said she believes most people don’t understand the current language used on food labels.

“It’s confusing to most consumers,” Acosta told The Associated Press as she shopped Tuesday at a Smart & Final store in Los Angeles.

She used to work at a small grocery store, so she’s developed the habit of examining her meat purchases for smell or discoloration before using the food. A sell-by date helps the grocer adhere to a “first in first out” method for its products and get ready for the next shipment arrival, but doesn’t mean the food has gone bad, according to Acosta.

While shopping Tuesday, she picked up a pack of meat that said “use or freeze by” — phrasing that she believes is relatively clear compared to other language but could still be confusing.

“It would obviously help everybody try to be on the same spectrum and make sure everything’s able to be used by the consumers, or if not it’s just a waste of money,” Acosta said.

Associated Press writer Jaimie Ding contributed to this report from Los Angeles.

California has become the first state to ban confusing ‘best before’ labels on food in all major supermarkets.

The legislation, pushed through by Governor Gavin Newsom over the weekend, aims to help consumers stop playing guessing games with the produce in their fridges.

Food labels that say ‘sell by’ or ‘best before’ have no universal meaning under current laws.

There are more than 50 different date labels on packaged food sold in stores across the US, but the information is largely unregulated and does not relate to food safety.

‘Sell by’ dates, for example, often act as a guide for stores to pull products from shelves, and not as an indicator of whether the product is still safe to consume. 

With no federal regulations dictating what information these labels should include, this often leads to customer confusion – and nearly 20 percent of the nation’s food waste, according to the Food and Drug Administration.

In California alone, around six million tons of unexpired food is tossed in the trash each year.

‘Having to wonder whether our food is still good is an issue that we all have struggled with,’ said author of the bill, Democratic Assembly member Jacqui Irwin.

The new law ‘is a monumental step to keep money in the pockets of consumers while helping the environment and the planet,’ she added.

Taking effect in July 2026, the new rules set a new standard for food labeling in the Golden State. 

They will replace the current labels with a ‘best if used by’ label to signal peak quality of a product, and a ‘use by’ label for product safety. 

The law will provide an exemption for eggs, beer and other malt beverages. 

It comes as similar efforts around the country remain halted at the federal level.

Lawmakers and advocates in California said they have spent the last decade trying to pass legislation to reduce food labeling confusion and cut down on food waste.

‘Food waste rates are not decreasing, they’re increasing,’ said Erica Parker with Californians Against Waste, who sponsored the bill. 

Supporters hope the legislation could pave the way for new food labeling standards across the country. 

‘California has such a large market share that we do think this will push manufacturers,’ said Nina Sevilla with Natural Resources Defense Council, who also sponsored the bill. 

‘The hope is that California serves as a model either for other states or ultimately to push action at the federal level.’

Shopper Jasmine Acosta, 23, told The Associated Press she believes most people do not understand the current language used on food labels.

‘It’s confusing to most consumers,’ she said as she shopped Tuesday at a Smart & Final store in Los Angeles.

She used to work at a small grocery store, so she has developed the habit of examining her meat purchases for smell or discoloration before using the food, she said. 

A sell-by date helps the grocer adhere to a ‘first in first out’ method for its products and get ready for the next shipment arrival, but does not mean the food has gone bad, according to Acosta.

While shopping Tuesday, she picked up a pack of meat that said ‘use or freeze by’ – phrasing that she believes is relatively clear compared to other language but could still be confusing.

Shoppers wait in line to buy groceries at a Gelson’s supermarket Friday, March 20, 2020, in the Sherman Oaks section of Los Angeles

The new legislation, pushed through by Governor Gavin Newsom over the weekend, aims to help consumers stop playing guessing games with the produce in their fridges

A customer looks at refrigerated items at a Grocery Outlet store in Pleasanton, Calif.

‘It would obviously help everybody try to be on the same spectrum and make sure everything’s able to be used by the consumers, or if not it’s just a waste of money,’ Acosta told the outlet.

It comes after Governor Newsom also banned plastic bags in California stores. 

The change, which was signed into law earlier this year, will take legal effect on January 1, 2026, and will affect all grocery stores.

Some grocery chains such as Whole Foods have already phased out plastic bags at their checkouts nationwide. 

Consumers will be encouraged to bring their own bags to do their shopping, and those who do not will be offered a paper alternative. 

The new law will only affect the plastic bags used at supermarket checkouts, not the plastic bags that contain produce.