For Clients & Friends of The Gualco Group, Inc.
IN THIS ISSUE – “They all have come to prefer island living”
Tom Philip, Sacramento Bee editor, on dysfunction among Governor and Legislative Leaders
- Distrust Deepens Among Governor, Legislative Leaders
- “Bereft of Civic-Mindedness”: Newsom, McGuire, Rivas
- Welcome Back to Your Backyard, Governor
- Final Verdicts on Pending Legislative Bills
- State Treasurer Settles Employee Harassment Case; Taxpayers Pay $350,000
- California Political Parties Gain Registration as Independents Drop
Capitol News & Notes (CN&N) curates California policy, legislative and regulatory insights from dozens of media and official sources for the past week. Please feel free to forward this unique client service.
FOR THE WEEK ENDING SEPT. 6, 2024
Note: CN&N will not publish next week, returning on Sept. 20
Distrust Deepens Among Governor, Legislative Leaders
Politico CA Playbook
Things between Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and Gov. Gavin Newsom are awkward — and, based on their public remarks, only getting more so.
It’s not the first time Newsom has called a special session to deal with gas prices — but it’s the first time a legislative leader ever initially refused such a request, according to longtime Capitol observers.
McGuire told colleagues and LA Times columnist George Skelton last night that his house will now wait until their counterparts in the Assembly can muster enough votes to pass Newsom’s gas price plan before calling the upper chamber back to special session.
McGuire also outlined his stance in an interview with the Los Angeles Times on Thursday, saying, “This issue has never been about simply convening. It’s about lining up the votes.”
McGuire’s requirement could break a weeklong logjam that began after Newsom called on lawmakers to immediately convene a special session to pass his proposal to combat gas price spikes by requiring oil refineries to store more fuel.
“It’s a waste of everybody’s time if they still don’t have the votes to do what the governor wants to do,” one legislator told Playbook.
But Rivas balked Thursday night at the Senate’s repeated insinuation that the Assembly didn’t have the votes to pass the bill. Spokesperson Nick Miller pushed back, arguing the Assembly wants to be thoughtful and hold public hearings about a bill that could affect millions of Californians.
“It’s about process, not votes,” he said in a statement. “The votes have and will always be there for sound public policy. We look forward to delivering results with the pro tem and the Senate if they come back to work.”
It’s happening against a backdrop of deepening distrust between the two legislative houses. Assembly Democrats were on board with the special session after complaining last week that they didn’t have enough time to vet the bills by Saturday. Now, they’re moving ahead with the governor despite the Senate’s cold shoulder.
“I’m glad to see the Assembly is moving this important proposal forward to save Californians hundreds of millions of dollars at the pump,” the governor said in a statement.
Meanwhile, Senate Dems were in lockstep behind McGuire. They’re all being as diplomatic as the situation could possibly permit:
“I respect that the Assembly wanted to take more time,” state Sen. Scott Wiener told our Jeremy B. White Tuesday. “In the Senate, we were prepared to move.”
But that just raises more questions about why exactly the Senate didn’t playing ball, and what kind of outcome McGuire is hoping to achieve.
The Assembly had the opportunity to pass the energy legislation Newsom wants to push through, but held off, saying members needed more time to consider. As McGuire repeatedly said on Sunday, his body had the votes, and the proposal in question — state Sen. Nancy Skinner’s Senate Bill 950 — was awaiting approval in the Assembly when the clock struck midnight for the deadline. Speaker Robert Rivas, for his part, had already said that the body wouldn’t move the bill without committee hearings.
The Assembly, by merit of its size, has many more personalities and opinions to contend with than the Senate. The speaker has continually said his members want more time to vet the legislation through committee hearings.
The fall can be a critical time for legislators — even those not hitting the campaign trail — to do constituent services and tend to matters in their districts. Returning for a special session that, as McGuire observed, could drag on for months, isn’t the most appealing proposal for the chamber that was ready to pass the bill on Saturday night.
The Assembly is prepared to gavel in, though a date has not been set. Rivas on Wednesday announced the 19 members of a Petroleum and Gasoline Supply Committee for the special session, chaired by Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris.
“Bereft of Civic-Mindedness”: Newsom, McGuire, Rivas
Sacramento Bee commentary from Tom Philip, chief editorial writer
This could be the worst threesome to run California in a very long time. Governor Gavin Newsom, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and Senate Pro Tem Mike McGuire emerged at the end of this year’s legislative session, which ended Saturday, as independent autocrats as opposed to a functioning team of Democrats.
They disagreed. They proposed big reforms at the last minute. Too often they failed. And while they can’t make spectacles of themselves any more this session because it is thankfully over, there’s no reason to think that they can do any better conducting the people’s business any time soon.
This session’s lowlights began with the implosion of an effort to address the state’s electricity crisis and the skyrocketing bills of the investor-owned utilities such as Pacific Gas & Electric.
There had been weeks of chatter that the Democrats would make some effort to lower electricity bills for consumers, but no actual legislation. The whole concept appeared dead.
And then within mere days of the close of session, Democrats unveiled complex pieces of legislation. Its centerpiece was Assembly Bill 3121 by Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris, D-Irvine. It proposed to give one-time refunds of electricity bills, estimated in the $30 range, to the millions of customers of these for-profit utilities.
But it would have done so in the most destructive of ways, by diverting funds from existing programs intended to support schools and low-income Californians. McGuire in the Senate led in this so-called “California Made” package of reforms. But soon after AB 3121 made its debut, it was dead in a Senate committee.
AB 3121’s death was a blessing that needed no disguise. It purported to lower electricity bills with a one-time refund that couldn’t cover a tank of gas. It wouldn’t have reduced a penny of actual electricity costs.
It turned out that the leadership meltdown over this bill was just the beginning. Following through on his threat, Newsom called an immediate “special session” to ram through yet another last-minute idea, this one a mandate of the state’s oil refineries to amass more reserves to avoid price spikes during production slowdowns. But McGuire ignored Newsom’s maneuver.
This dysfunction starts at the top. Saturday night exemplified how the imperious and distant Newsom has horrible relations with his fellow Democrats in the Legislature. He treats them more like children than partners. Newsom leads like an island unto himself, now relocated to Marin.
All Rivas and McGuire have done is replicate Newsom’s style of bad governance. They have become their own islands. None of them seem to care what the other two think. They are bereft of the civic mindedness of putting the public first, leaving egos at the door and making some really tough decisions. They all have come to prefer island living.
The longer this threesome has been in power, the worse their coordination has become. The implosion at the end of this session may be a small taste of what is to come. Newsom finds himself in political steerage with Kamala Harris’ ascendancy to the Democratic Party’s throne.
He is fast becoming an asterisk on the national stage. He has grown so tired of Sacramento, his family no longer calls it home. None of this bodes well for his home stretch as governor. Real answers to any of our crises – housing, insurance, electricity, homeless, climate change – will not be popular.
For California’s three top Democrats, real change means respectfully working together, reaching a consensus, watching each other’s back and working with legislators on both sides of the aisle. And that simply isn’t happening. Good governance is an endangered species in Sacramento. With the threesome of Newsom, Rivas and McGuire, it is on the verge of extinction.
https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article291763875.html#storylink=cpy
Welcome Back to Your Backyard, Governor
LA Times commentary from George Skelton
Gov. Gavin Newsom should now narrow his focus from national politics to pivotal races in his own backyard.
Here’s an important politician who’s suddenly without an important political gig in this extraordinarily important election season. But he could find a significant gig right here in California.
A few California congressional races will help determine which party controls the next U.S. House of Representatives. And Newsom could help Democrats win back the House, now under razor-thin Republican control.
But Newsom would need to lower his sights from being a high-profile national player to playing the role of a home-state fighter for his party.
Newsom already has been taken out of national play anyway — by Vice President Kamala Harris and by the governor himself at the Democratic National Convention.
Harris’ lightning-fast ascendency to the Democratic presidential nomination after President Biden’s withdrawal bumped Newsom out of White House contention until at least 2028, and most likely forever.
If Harris beats Republican Donald Trump in November, she’ll run for reelection in 2028 and Newsom wouldn’t contest her in the primaries. By 2032, he’ll be 64 — still young compared to Biden and Trump currently — but there will be lots of younger presidential wannabes lining up and Newsom will have been out of elective office for six years.
If Harris loses to Trump, Newsom could run in 2028. But there will be plenty of other contenders — including potentially Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, whom Harris elevated to national prominence by choosing him as her running mate.
I’ve never been convinced Newsom really wants to run for president anyway — that deep down he has the proverbial “fire in the belly.”
I figure he merely wants to be considered presidential material and be mentioned prominently in the national media as a potential candidate. And be seen as a player on national policies. It upgrades his status.
That was confirmed for me when Newsom passed up a coveted invitation to speak on opening night at the convention. The governor said his flight from California arrived too late after he participated in a school orientation for his kids.
Really? A back-to-school event is a higher priority than a nationally televised convention speech if you harbor presidential ambitions? Hard to believe. And given his longtime alliance with Harris, Newsom couldn’t arrange for another speaking slot?
“He hates giving speeches,” a top Newsom aide once told me. “It’s anxiety-producing.”
That’s because of the dyslexia Newsom has struggled with all his life. He must repeatedly rehearse speech deliveries.
In fact, Newsom has stopped giving annual State of the State addresses to a joint session of the Legislature — usually citing some concocted excuse, but really because of his difficulty with speech-reading.
Too bad, because he’s an excellent ad libber.
At any rate, roughly 10 other governors took advantage of their convention opportunities and gained national attention by giving televised speeches. They included several presumed presidential aspirants who gained a step on Newsom.
Harris seems unlikely to give Newsom the attention-getting national surrogate role he enjoyed when Biden was running. Harris and Newsom are both San Francisco liberals — the species that makes moderate voters in swing states naturally suspicious. She doesn’t need another left coast lib out there promoting her candidacy.
“People in the other states don’t like us,” says former Democratic strategist Darry Sragow. “Not only is she from California, she’s from the Bay Area. There’s no purpose to be served for her by putting a yellow highlighter on that. I wouldn’t put him on the road.”
But there are some hotly contested congressional races in California where he could boost the Democrat.
“He can absolutely help raise money for those campaigns,” says Sragow, who until recently was publisher of the California Target Book, which monitors state legislative and congressional races.
But Sragow added, “if I was running one of the Democratic campaigns, it’s not clear to me that we would want to invite the governor to show up” at a rally. “I don’t know that it would help.”
That’s because in most of the House districts with competitive races, Newsom lost in his 2022 reelection race to Republican Brian Dahle, a little-known rural state senator. So, Newsom might not have much influence with Republicans and independents. And most of these districts have an unusually large number of GOP voters.
“If he wanted to help,” Sragow says, “he could do it in a very targeted way intended to boost Democratic turnout. That would be a good use of his time and resources. But he has to stay within the Democratic family.”
Of 10 races generally considered to be competitive, seven are currently held by Republicans and three by Democrats. Most are in Southern California, but three are in the San Joaquin Valley.
Governors don’t ordinarily focus on congressional contests. Candidates run on federal issues, not state matters. But there’s lots of overlap. And Newsom has been stumping the nation on federal issues while enhancing his national profile.
By pitching in locally as a team player and helping Democrats win back the House, Newsom could earn national party chits if he ever does actually run for president.
Meanwhile, he’d have more time to do his day job in Sacramento. There’s plenty piled up for him to do.
| Final Verdicts on Pending Legislative Bills
CalMatters The governor has to decide the fate of hundreds of bills by Sept. 30. CalMatters is tracking noteworthy ones on nearly 30 issues. The latest include: |
|
State Treasurer Settles Employee Harassment Case; Taxpayers Pay $350,000
Sacramento Bee
California State Treasurer Fiona Ma, who is running as a Democrat to be the state’s next lieutenant governor in 2026, has closed the case on the harassment allegations against her — at the state’s expense.
A PR firm representing Ma released a statement Thursday announcing that the complainant, Judith Blackwell, was abandoning her claim that Ma sexually harassed her, bringing an end to a three-year case that was set to go to trial soon.
“From day one, I said this was a frivolous lawsuit filed by a disgruntled employee who fabricated claims in an attempt to embarrass me in hopes of receiving millions of dollars in a settlement,” said Ma. “After three years of delay, I have been completely vindicated, and can continue my work on affordable housing, climate action and job creation without distraction.”
Ma’s attorney, Ognian Gavrilov of Sacramento, said in a statement that Ma had rejected multiple settlement attempts from Blackwell. “This is a complete victory for the Treasurer,” Gavrilov said. “We were ready to have the truth be brought to light in the courtroom, but the attorneys for the plaintiff clearly did not want a trial and instead dropped all of their causes of action against Treasurer Ma.”
But there’s more to the story.
As first reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, and verified by The Bee, while Ma isn’t paying any settlement, the State of California is. Golden State taxpayers will pay Blackwell to the tune of $350,000, though the agreement specifies that doing so is not an admission of any wrongdoing.
“My client is excited that we came to an amicable resolution of her case and she is ready to move forward with her life,” Blackwell’s attorney, Waukeen McCoy told The Bee. “And this case presents that no one is above the law.”
McCoy said it was ridiculous for Ma to claim that she was vindicated in this case when the resolution included an exchange of hundreds of thousands of dollars. He said the case can only be dismissed once the state pays the settlement, which he has yet to receive.
McCoy rejected Gavrilov’s claim that his side did not want to go to trial. ”I have no idea why she thinks she’s vindicated from this when the state had to paid $350,000 to resolve this matter,” McCoy said. Under the agreement, all remaining claims against Ma are withdrawn.
In an interview with KCRA, Gavrilov called the Department of Justice choice to pay out a “business decision” made to save taxpayers the expense of a trial. Ma expressed disappointment with the agreement, which she was not part of. “I’m not happy they’re getting anything, I really wanted my day in court,” Ma told KCRA.
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article291722975.html#storylink=cpy
California Political Parties Gain Registration as Independents Drop
Sacramento Bee
Nearly half of all California voters are Democrats, according to the Public Policy Institute of California, which released its finding last week. The PPIC found that 46.2% of California voters vote Democratic, up about a percentage point from 2020 (45.3%).
Republicans, too, saw a slight uptick in registration, with 24.7% this year compared to 23.9% in 2020. The GOP has fallen dramatically in enrollment over the last few decades; in 2004, more than a third (34.7%) of California voters identified as Republican.
Meanwhile, the share of No Party Preference, or independent, voters has declined in recent years, with 21.9% identifying as such in 2024, down from 25.1% in 2020.
Independents make up a little more than a fifth of the California electorate. According to the PPIC, independents split evenly as either lean Democratic or no party preference, at 38%, while 24% say they lean Republican. They’re more likely to be “moderate” in their politics (54%) than liberal (25%) or conservative (20%). As for likely voters, a disproportionate number of them are white. White people make up just 38% of the state population, but account for half of all likely voters. Latinos, who make up 36% of the state, only comprise 26% of likely voters.
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article291706470.html#storylink=cpy