Connect with us

California

Kamala Harris refuses to say if she’s voting for tougher criminal sentences in California

Published

on

Kamala Harris refuses to say if she’s voting for tougher criminal sentences in California


Advertisement

Kamala Harris refused to answer when asked how she would vote on a measure to impose harsher sentences on criminals in California.

The vice president was taking questions from reporters in Michigan on Sunday when she discussed if she had cast her own ballot in the final hours of the race.

The Democratic nominee confirmed she’d be voting by mail and hoped it would get to her home state in time.

She was then grilled on how she voted on Proposition 36, a ballot measure that could be tough on crime. 

Harris is frantically campaigning across the swing states with less than 48 hours until what could be one of the closest presidential elections in history. 

Advertisement

She received a boost in the polls over the weekend, with a New York Times poll showing her trailing in only two of the seven swing states and a stunning Des Moines Register surveys showing her ahead of Trump in the deep red state of Iowa.

Kamala Harris refused to answer when asked how she would vote on a measure to impose harsher sentences on criminals in California

‘So I have my ballot, it’s on its way to California, and I’m going to trust the system that it will arrive there, and I am not going to talk about the vote on that, because, honestly, it’s the Sunday before the election, and I don’t intend to create an endorsement one way or another around it,’ she said.

Prop 36 would strengthen penalties for certain drug and theft crimes and reverse progressive criminal justice reforms under Proposition 47.

It would upgrade crimes involving repeat shoplifting and fentanyl from misdemeanors to felonies and would crackdown on repeat offenders. 

The measure is unpopular among progressive Democrats and California Governor Gavin Newsom, it is overwhelmingly popular among Californians.

Advertisement

Harris’ record on crime and her record as a prosecutor in San Francisco has been a frequent attack line used by Republicans during the campaign.

Trump and his allies have zeroed in on light sentences and criminals who have gone on to reoffend following their release from prison.

The vice president was taking questions from reporters in Michigan on Sunday when she discussed if she had cast her own ballot in the final hours of the race

The vice president was taking questions from reporters in Michigan on Sunday when she discussed if she had cast her own ballot in the final hours of the race

Harris is frantically campaigning across the swing states with less than 48 hours until what could be one of the closest presidential elections in history

Harris is frantically campaigning across the swing states with less than 48 hours until what could be one of the closest presidential elections in history 

The GOP have also linked the vice president to migrants who have committed violent offences after crossing the border.

Harris at the same time has used her time as California’s top law enforcement officer to prove she has the credentials to be President of the United States.

In October she was again evasive when asked about Prop 36.

Advertisement

‘I’ve not voted yet and I’ve actually not read it yet,’ Harris told reporters ahead of a flight from Detroit to New Jersey, in response to a question about Proposition 36. ‘But I’ll let you know.’

Harris also avoided taking a stance on Proposition 47 when it was on the ballot in California in 2024.

The measure reduced the number of people serving prison sentences for nonviolent drug offences and sent millions to treatment and rehabilitation programs. 

It also called for anyone stealing goods valued at less than $950 to be charged with a misdemeanor.

As a result, retail stores were left relatively helpless when stealing from their stores.

Advertisement

Walmart and In-N-Out Burger are among the companies financing the campaign behind Proposition 36.

Advertisement



Source link

California

California just handed oil companies billions in free pollution permits

Published

on

California just handed oil companies billions in free pollution permits


By Alejandro Lazo, CalMatters

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

California air regulators on Friday approved a contentious overhaul of the state’s carbon market, creating a program that could steer billions of dollars in free pollution permits to oil refineries and other major polluters over the objections of environmental groups, key lawmakers and three of the board’s own members.

Advertisement

Ten members of the California Air Resources Board voted to adopt the changes to its cap-and-invest program after two days of lengthy hearings, including a full day dedicated to hundreds of public comments.

The overhaul followed intensive lobbying by the oil industry as well as pressure from Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration to help keep refineries operating in the state amid rising gas prices.

The approval sets up a potential budget fight in Sacramento. The Legislative Analyst’s Office projects that quarterly auction revenue for state climate programs will drop from roughly $4 billion a year to about $2 billion under the new overhaul.

Such a shortfall would effectively zero out programs lawmakers spent last year fighting to fund: affordable housing, public transit, drinking water in low-income communities and pollution monitoring in California’s most polluted neighborhoods.

The governor’s office praised the measure as a compromise that balanced economic uncertainty with the state’s climate goals. Refinery closures and the Iran-Israel war have driven average California gas prices above $6 a gallon. 

Advertisement

Newsom, in a statement, used the moment to draw a contrast with President Donald Trump.

“While Trump sows ongoing chaos and uncertainty, California is staying focused by protecting our economy, safeguarding public health, and doubling down on the clean energy future all Californians deserve,” he said. 

Environmentalists warned the changes to the program amount to a giveaway to the fossil fuel industry that weakens California’s only program setting a firm cap on greenhouse gas emissions.

Katelyn Roedner Sutter, California senior director for the Environmental Defense Fund, called the decision “deeply misguided” for prioritizing polluters over communities.

“Newsom’s air regulators are handing billions to oil executives at the expense of our climate, health, and affordability for working families in a rushed process that has shortchanged meaningful public participation,” said Bahram Fazeli, policy director at Communities for a Better Environment. 

Advertisement

How the program works — and what changes

California’s 13-year-old carbon market forces major polluters to buy permits while the state lowers the overall cap each year. Friday’s vote will reduce those permits – and creates a new subsidy program carved out of the market.

The program, which may still see changes, could make available a new pool of free pollution permits available to industry valued at as much as $4 billion. Companies that pledge to invest in clean energy and efficiency may qualify for the permits in exchange for investments in clean energy. 

The pool will be capped at 118.3 million permits — the same number the air board has said must come off the market for California to hit its 2030 climate target. Environmentalists say the proposal risks wiping out those reductions. 

Half are reserved for the fossil fuel sector. A recent Berkeley analysis, by the chair of an independent committee that oversees the carbon market, found refineries could end up with more free permits than they need to cover their emissions.

The air board has defended the design. Officials say the credits will go only to companies undertaking decarbonization projects, will be limited and temporary and can be clawed back if companies misuse them. The plan, they say, is meant to keep California refineries operating at a time of mounting closures and global market pressure. According to air regulators, the amended program will spur clean-energy investment as Trump cuts federal support.

Advertisement

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



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Man charged with murder, kidnapping their 5-year-old child before fleeing to Mexico

Published

on

Man charged with murder, kidnapping their 5-year-old child before fleeing to Mexico


A 40-year-old Los Angeles man was charged with murder after allegedly killing his girlfriend and kidnapping their young child before fleeing to Mexico, according to authorities.

Ruben Fregosojuarez has been charged one count of murder and one misdemeanor count of child abuse under circumstance or conditions other than great bodily injury or death, according to a Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office news release. Authorities first identified him as Ruben Fregoso but Los Angeles County prosecutors listed him as Ruben Fregosojuarez.

On Monday around 12:39 p.m., the Los Angeles Police Department conducted a welfare check in the 2600 block of South Alsace Avenue in West Adams, police said in a news release.

Officers found a woman dead inside the home “as a result of violence” and the woman’s daughter missing, police said. On Monday night, the California Highway Patrol issued an Amber Alert for the child, Daleza.

Advertisement

Photos obtained by NBC4 appear to show Fregosojuarez in a parking garage in San Ysidro with the girl on Sunday. The California Highway Patrol has listed her age as 4 years old but Los Angeles police say the girl is 5. She is also described as the suspect’s daughter.

The alert said that the girl was last seen with Fregosojuarez, who allegedly abducted her in a 2019 Land Rover Discovery, on Sunday at about 4 a.m.

The CHP posted in an update that the vehicle was found but that the child and man were still missing. The girl is described as 3 feet tall, 45 pounds, and having black hair and brown eyes.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

23andMe Sued by California Over Massive 2023 Data Breach

Published

on

23andMe Sued by California Over Massive 2023 Data Breach


California’s attorney general is suing the consumer genetics testing company formerly known as 23andMe, alleging the company failed to protect customers’ sensitive personal information in a massive 2023 data breach that exposed the ancestry and genetic data of nearly 7 million people.

Attorney General Rob Bonta filed the lawsuit on Thursday in San Francisco Superior Court against Chrome Holding Co., formerly known as 23andMe, accusing the company of failing to properly investigate or respond to numerous warnings that its systems had been compromised. The company’s mail-in self-testing kits became synonymous with DNA testing before it filed for bankruptcy in 2025.

In 2023, cybercriminals breached 23andMe’s systems by using a “credential-stuffing attack,” which involves bombarding online accounts with huge sets of user names and passwords stolen in previous unrelated attacks. Over a period of months, the intruders were able to make off with the personal data of more than 6.9 million people.

Advertisement

“23andMe’s security measures were so lax that the threat actor was able to operate undetected within 23andMe’s systems for over five months, and remarkably, 23andMe only began investigating after the threat actor offered the stolen user data for sale on the dark web and reached out to 23andMe to demand a ransom,” Bonta’s office said in the complaint. 

The San Francisco-based company, which allowed people to submit genetic materials and get a snapshot of their ancestry, revealed in October 2023 that hackers had accessed customer information in the prolonged data breach that targeted customers with Chinese or Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry. The stolen data of more than 1 million Asian-Pacific Islander and Ashkenazi Jewish users was later posted for sale on the dark web. 

“The sale of this data on the dark web took place amidst a period of mounting anti-Asian American and Pacific Islander and antisemitic hate and violence,” Bonta said in a press release. “This is disturbing and incredibly dangerous.”

 A January 2024 lawsuit accused the company of not doing enough to protect its customers and not notifying certain customers that their data had been targeted specifically. It later settled the lawsuit for $30 million.

23andMe representatives didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

At its peak, 23andMe became the best-known name in the emerging area of DNA self-testing, with users paying upwards of $99 for kits that gave them insights into their genetic makeup, potential relatives and ancestry. But the company’s momentum slowed down in recent years after its $3.5 billion public offering in 2021.

Last July, TTAM Research Institute, a nonprofit led by Anne Wojcicki, 23andMe’s cofounder and former CEO, acquired 23andMe’s assets for $305 million.    





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending