CA recall reform moves forward, but other bills don’t

A sweeping change to California elections took a big step forward Thursday — a measure to revise statewide recalls. 

For Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2021 recall election, voters were faced with two questions on the ballot: Should the governor be recalled? And if he is recalled, who should replace him? 

But the proposed constitutional amendment, which passed the Senate on a 31-7 vote and now heads to the Assembly, aims to get rid of that second question. Introduced by Democratic Sen. Josh Newman of Fullerton, the measure would allow the lieutenant governor to be installed if a governor is recalled. 

By doing so, it would prevent recall campaigns from being hijacked for “political opportunism and gamesmanship,” Newman said in a statement, and prevent a candidate who didn’t receive a majority of the votes from becoming governor. 

After the failed 2021 recall, there was an immediate push to change the rules, but the momentum had evaporated, until this week. If it gets through the Legislature, the amendment would go before voters in November.  

As a constitutional amendment, this measure wasn’t subject to Wednesday’s deadline for bills introduced in 2023 to pass their first chamber. But a bushel were — and some didn’t make it.  

Media access: A measure to make real-time police radio communications accessible to the press and public died Tuesday. The author of the bill, Democratic Sen. Josh Becker of Menlo Park, said it would help residents prepare for emergencies related to shootings, crashes and natural disasters. But some law enforcement groups opposed the bill due to costs, officer safety and logistical issues. Another bill to ensure press accessibility to state prisons — such as tours and in-person interviews with prisoners — did pass, however.

Youth tackle football: Assemblymember Kevin McCarty’s contentious bill to ban kids age six and under (amended from 12 when it was originally introduced) from playing tackle football didn’t reach the goal line. The Democrat from Sacramento received pushback from parental rights groups, citing government overreach, as well as Newsom who said he would veto the measure.

Campaign contributions: Though foreign governments, parties and companies are already banned from directly donating to federal, state and local elections, a bill to bar “foreign influenced” U.S. companies from contributing to California elections “will not be moving forward in the legislative process,” said the office of Assemblymember Alex Lee, a Milpitas Democrat and author of the proposal.

Hydrogen production: Assemblymember Steve Bennett’s bill to further regulate hydrogen production, including a mandate that all hydrogen produced or used in California for electric vehicles be from renewable energy resources by 2045, has been nixed. The bill from the Oxnard Democrat faced strong opposition from industry and labor lobbyists, reports Politico.

Californians bought more electric cars than ever before last year. But sluggish sales growth, and production cutbacks also mean the auto industry remains cautious about its EV ambitions.

As CalMatters climate reporter Alejandro Lazo explains, the state’s energy commission reported Thursday that more than 446,000 electric cars were sold in California in 2023 — a 29% increase from 2022. 

But the pace of EV adoption is slowing: From 2021 to 2022, sales increased 38%. The industry has also experienced a few high-profile setbacks. Hertz is replacing about a third of its electric rental cars with gas-powered ones; Ford is reducing production of its F-150 Lightning electric truck (which had a three-year waiting list when it debuted in 2022); and Tesla sales dropped in California near the end of 2023.

Some experts, however, say these roadblocks shouldn’t be too much cause for concern. Sales of all cars slowed last year and “if they can come up with an excuse to slow down their investments, they’re going to do it,“ said the director of the Institute for Transportation Studies at UC Davis.

Learn more about the state’s EV adoption in Alejandro’s piece.

Speaking of the environment: Several California water boards, along with the state’s fish and wildlife department, have reached a settlement with a Humboldt County cannabis grower who has agreed to pay $750,000 for violating regulations protecting water supplies and wildlife, reports CalMatters Rachel Becker. From 2017 to 2020, Joshua Sweet took enough water for his cannabis operation to supply about 49 households for a year. The sizable penalty is notable since the water boards have limited authority to enforce California’s water laws, though Sweet said that “there would be no settlement without their need to ‘make an example of me first.’”

Read more about the settlement in Rachel’s story.

And in even more environmental news: California Environmental Voters downgraded state elected officials from an A- (91%) to a B (86%) in its annual scorecard, released Thursday. While two climate change disclosure laws (now being challenged in court) were approved last year, the advocacy group argued that the state cut climate funding, extended fossil fuel plants and weakened some environmental protection laws.

• Mary Creasman, the group’s CEO, in a statement: “California’s climate action in 2023 was two steps forward and one step back….We’re counting on our leaders to go big in 2024.” 

For 2023 actions, the group gave 100% scores to 20 legislators, 96% to Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and Senate leader Toni Atkins and 80% to Gov. Newsom.

Mail ballots start going out next week for the March 5 primary, so developments came fast and furious Thursday in California’s marquee U.S. Senate race.

A new poll showed Democrat Katie Porter and Republican Steve Garvey neck and neck for second place, behind Democrat Adam Schiff. Schiff had the support of 25% of likely voters, while Garvey and Porter each had 15% in the survey, conducted by researchers at USC, Cal Poly Pomona and Long Beach State. Remember, the top two finishers, regardless of party, move on to November.

Schiff, who’s also leading the money race, launched a new ad that attacks Garvey as a Trump supporter who is too conservative for California. It’s seen as a way to rally Republicans around Garvey, who would be a less formidable foe in November given the Democratic edge in statewide races. Porter certainly thinks that’s the strategy.

• Porter, on X (formerly Twitter): “Adam Schiff knows he will lose to me in November. That’s what this brazenly cynical ad is about — furthering his own political career, boxing out qualified Democratic women candidates, and boosting a Republican candidate to do it.”

While Schiff’s ad might elevate him, Garvey drew some unwanted attention in a Los Angeles Times story that questions his clean-cut image and includes the first public comments from two children he fathered with women before marrying his current wife.

• Garvey, in a statement to the Times: “These experiences have equipped me to better understand the adversities others face in their lives, and to serve the public with empathy and integrity, something that has been lacking in Washington, D.C.”

And Porter is at least indirectly bringing attention to the fact that at 50, she is much younger than Schiff, Garvey or Democrat Barbara Lee, the San Francisco Chronicle reports. “It’s incredibly clear to most Californians, especially of my generation and younger, that Washington is broken,” she told the Chronicle editorial board.

This is all potential fodder for the second U.S. Senate debate, Feb. 12 in San Francisco, hosted by KTLA and Nextstar Media.

From CalMatters economy reporter Levi Sumagaysay: 

Insurance companies and California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara have blamed the state’s insurance woes on what they call outdated regulations. 

But Proposition 103 — which was passed by voters in 1988 and includes a provision that the state’s insurance department has final say over rate increases — has helped customers save billions of dollars in premiums, the department says on its website. Consumer Watchdog, the nonprofit advocacy group whose founder wrote Prop. 103, on Thursday released a 42-page report that calculates the savings at more than $5 billion in auto and home insurance premiums in the past 21 years.

Over that same period, the group has received $11.6 million in fees. It said it spent that money — paid by insurers as required by law — on attorneys and advocates, plus outside experts such as geologists and economists.

“You’ve been hearing a lot of the attacks on the process from the industry, some of which are getting repeated by lawmakers or the commissioner,” said Carmen Balber, Consumer Watchdog executive director, in an email to CalMatters. The report “debunks a lot of that misinformation.”

Consumer Watchdog has repeatedly used the intervenor process under Prop. 103, which allows the public and advocacy groups to challenge rate increases and recoup their costs for doing so. The group provides its analysis of publicly available data to show that when it did not intervene, insurers “got most of the rate increase they requested.” 

The Insurance Department is taking issue with Consumer Watchdog’s report. Spokesperson Michael Soller said in an email that the group is “overstating” its numbers “with no accounting for what the Department’s role was in that negotiation.”

As many major insurers have stopped writing home or fire insurance in the state, driving many homeowners to the last-resort FAIR Plan, Lara and insurers have accused Consumer Watchdog of slowing down rate reviews and profiting from Prop. 103. 

But the group — which has accused Lara of being too cozy with insurance companies as he proposes new regulations to try to get insurers to resume writing policies in the state — said in its report that “it takes significant expertise and resources to counter the industry’s army.” 

The group also accused Lara of approving some rate increases without adequate review.

• Soller: “To be attacked for making a decades-old process more fair, equitable and transparent speaks volumes about the attacker. We are focused on solutions, not petty games.”