The law makes it a crime to remove voted ballots from the custody of local election officials, a provision prompted in part by an incident earlier this year in Riverside County. Sheriff Chad Bianco, who is running for governor, seized more than 600,000 ballots from the county registrar of voters, saying his office was looking for evidence of fraudulent voting. No evidence has emerged showing that ballots were improperly cast.

Newsom said the state needed to make clear that election materials cannot be taken or handled outside established legal procedures.

“We have to step up, and we have to draw the line,” Newsom told reporters before signing the bill. He said the law is intended to clarify election rules and serve as a warning to those who might try to interfere with California’s voting process.

The measure, Senate Bill 73, was initially introduced by state lawmakers amid concerns about possible federal interference in California elections. Those concerns were heightened by tensions between the state and the Trump administration, as well as the national political stakes surrounding control of Congress.

But the Riverside County ballot seizure shifted the debate from a theoretical concern to an immediate one, prompting lawmakers to move quickly so the restrictions would be in place before voters cast ballots in the primary.

Under the new law, county registrars are prohibited from turning over ballots or voting equipment to law enforcement officers, including county sheriffs and deputies. If the law had been in effect at the time of the Riverside County incident, Registrar Art Tinoco would have been barred from allowing the sheriff’s department to take custody of the ballots, even with the search warrant deputies presented.

Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, a Democratic coauthor of the bill and former Santa Cruz County registrar of voters, said voters must be able to trust that ballots remain secure.

“Voters should never wonder whether ballots were improperly handled,” Pellerin said. “And law enforcement powers should never be misused in ways that jeopardize the integrity of our democratic process.”

The law also confirms that the state attorney general, secretary of state or local election officials may sue any person, company or entity that takes a package containing ballots from an election official’s custody.

Voting rights advocates welcomed the swift action, calling the Riverside County seizure extraordinary.

Kim Alexander, president of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation, said she was not aware of any similar ballot seizure occurring elsewhere in the country. The Legislature’s response, she said, signals to voters that state officials recognized the seriousness of what happened.

The law includes additional provisions allowing the attorney general and secretary of state, in certain circumstances, to override county election officials. Supporters say those safeguards are intended to prevent local officials from undermining statewide election rules, such as by allowing armed personnel to gather near voting sites.

Those provisions come amid scrutiny of election administration in Shasta County, where Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis has drawn attention for his ties to 2020 election deniers and public skepticism of voting machines. Curtis, who had no prior experience running elections before being appointed registrar in 2024, also reduced the number of ballot drop boxes in the county. He has faced allegations of workplace violence and harassment, including claims that he threatened to drag employees from his office by their hair. Curtis has denied the accusations.

The new law also bars individuals from allowing law enforcement officers to access, disrupt, alter or take possession of voting technology without a court order.

Another section prevents election observers from challenging voter signatures. That issue gained attention last fall when the U.S. Justice Department, at the request of the California Republican Party, announced it would send election observers to California during the special election on Proposition 50. The move prompted concerns among Democrats and voting advocates that President Donald Trump was attempting to influence the outcome.

Alexander said the removal of ballots is only one potential threat to confidence in California elections. She also pointed to the state’s extended vote-counting timeline, which has become a frequent target of conspiracy theories and unsupported claims about election results.

Election advocates are urging Newsom to include roughly $55 million in the state budget for county election offices to purchase updated equipment and hire more staff, with the goal of speeding up ballot counting.

Newsom said Wednesday that budget discussions over election funding are progressing and that an agreement is expected soon.

Original source: CalMatters

The post New California Law Bars Law Enforcement From Interfering in State Elections appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Newsom has promoted his revised budget as a step toward restoring California’s fiscal footing before he leaves office, saying his administration has produced “a balanced budget structurally for 18 months.” The word “structurally” has become central to the debate because California has faced a continuing mismatch between spending commitments and ongoing revenue.

According to Legislative Analyst Gabe Petek, state budgets over the past four years have spent a combined $125 billion more than California actually brought in, after Newsom and the Legislature expanded programs based on revenue projections that proved too optimistic. Budget analysts commonly refer to that kind of ongoing imbalance as a structural deficit.

Newsom’s proposed $349.4 billion budget for the 2026-27 fiscal year, which begins July 1, estimates $226.5 billion in general fund tax revenue. But planned general fund spending would total $246.6 billion, leaving a roughly $20 billion gap. The shortfall is smaller than in some recent years, but it continues to raise questions about whether the state has truly solved its underlying budget problem.

The administration would close the gap through a combination of higher-than-expected short-term revenue, spending reductions, borrowing and other budget maneuvers. Still, the budget documents acknowledge that deficits are expected to continue in future years, though they may be smaller than earlier projections.

Petek has cautioned that the proposal still leaves California “ill-prepared” for even a modest downturn in revenue.

Newsom has defended the plan, saying, “We’re cutting deficits but not cutting corners.” But as the June 15 deadline approaches, advocates for schools, health care and social services are pressing legislators to reject cuts or funding delays affecting programs for low-income residents, children and people with disabilities.

At the Capitol, rallies and press events have become frequent as organizations seek to protect their funding. Education groups are especially critical of Newsom’s proposal because they say it withholds money that schools are entitled to receive under Proposition 98, the constitutional formula that sets minimum funding levels for K-12 schools and community colleges.

Last week, the California School Boards Association joined school unions and other education organizations at a rally outside the Capitol, calling on Newsom and legislators to provide the funding they say schools are owed.

Debra Schade, president of the school boards association, said Proposition 98 is “a matter of law, not a suggestion that can be discarded when it becomes inconvenient for policymakers.”

She criticized the administration for what she described as a third straight year of attempts to alter the minimum school funding guarantee. “Once we open the door to the idea that Proposition 98 can be manipulated whenever the state faces fiscal pressure, we fundamentally weaken the protections voters deliberately put in place for California students,” Schade said.

Health care advocates are also pushing back. Supporters of dental care for children in Medi-Cal released a report warning that more than 1.2 million low-income California children could lose access to dental services if Newsom’s proposed Medi-Cal dental reductions are approved.

Child care and early education advocates have objected as well, saying the governor’s plan would reduce all child care and pre-kindergarten programs by 2% in real spending. They argued that the proposal marks a reversal for a governor who has previously emphasized early childhood programs and family support.

The Legislature’s Democratic supermajority has historically supported many of the programs now at risk, and some lawmakers are expected to be sympathetic to advocates’ concerns. Raising taxes could be one way to avoid deeper reductions, but Newsom has shown little interest in ending his governorship with a major tax increase.

That sets up a difficult choice for Democratic legislators: accept reductions to programs they have championed, or challenge the governor’s budget framework in the final weeks of negotiations. The outcome will determine not only how the state closes its immediate deficit, but how much strain schools, health care providers and social service programs may face in the year ahead.

Original source: CalMatters

The post Newsom’s unbalanced budget faces strong pushback for spending cuts. Will lawmakers back him? appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom stepped in on Wednesday to help revive a bill in the state Legislature that would increase penalties for child trafficking in the state, siding with a Republican state senator over some members of his own party.

The bill by Republican state Sen. Shannon Grove would make child trafficking a serious felony in California. Anyone convicted of at least three serious felonies in California is punished by a sentence of between 25 years and life in prison, known as the “three strikes law.”

The bill had easily passed the Democratic-controlled Senate earlier this year, and Grove expected it to have little opposition in the Assembly. On Tuesday, Democrats on the Assembly Public Safety Committee declined to advance the bill, putting it in danger of not passing this year.

Newsom said Wednesday he was surprised the bill had stalled. He said he called Grove to talk about the bill, telling reporters that the call “is indicative of my desire to see what we can do with it.” Newsom said he “cares deeply” about the issue, noting he signed a state budget last year that included $25 million for services for children who had been victims of sex trafficking.

“I want to understand exactly what happened yesterday (in the committee),” Newsom said. “I take it very seriously.”

It’s unusual for Newsom to publicly get involved in a dispute at the Capitol, especially when it involves the Republican Party. Newsom prefers to stay out of such matters, often declining to answer reporters’ questions about pending legislation.

Newsom’s involvement on this issue highlights the split among Democrats over how best to prevent and punish crime. Some moderate Democrats favor increasing penalties for drug dealers and other criminals, decisions that would ensure they stay in prison longer. Some progressive Democrats oppose those bills, arguing it would lead only add to the mass incarceration of offenders, which they say has done little to deter crime.

“Longer sentences don’t actually stop things from happening,” Assembly Majority Leader Isaac Bryan, a Democrat from Los Angeles, said during Tuesday’s committee hearing. “All they do is increase our investment in systems of harm and subjugation at the expense of the investments that the communities need to not have this be a problem to begin with.”

The bill failed to pass the committee following an emotional public hearing that featured testimony from human trafficking victims. Some people wept after the vote total was announced, while others in the audience shouted “coward.”

Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer, a Democrat from Los Angeles and chair of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, told Grove on Tuesday he believes there is a path for the bill to become law. After the hearing, his office released a statement saying the committee members understood Grove’s intent but said the bill “needs considerable work.”

“The Three Strikes model of sentencing is ineffective in preventing crime and protecting the public’s safety,” the statement said. “We will not build on a deeply flawed sentencing system that unfairly punishes disadvantaged communities.”

New Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas said his office is working with Grove to “get it right,” telling a crowd at the Sacramento Press Club on Wednesday his office is “very engaged in this issue since I learned about it last night.”

It’s unclear what changes Democrats are seeking. Grove said she had a “productive meeting” with Jones-Sawyer on Wednesday afternoon, but said they did not reach an agreement. Grove said she is not interested in changing the bill, noting it cleared the state Senate with no opposition and has dozens of co-authors from both parties.

“The bill needs to be brought to the Assembly floor,” she said, “and it needs to be voted on as is.”

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post California Gov. Gavin Newsom steps in to help revive a stalled bill on child trafficking appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom says there’s no chance “on God’s green earth” he’s running for president in 2024, but he wants to make clear that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is running, is “weak” and “undisciplined” and “will be crushed by Donald Trump.” DeSantis, meanwhile, likes to mock Newsom’s apparent “fixation” on Florida while insisting that the Democratic governor’s “leftist government” is destroying California.

Welcome to one of the fiercest rivalries in U.S. politics, featuring dueling term-limited governors who represent opposite ends of the ideological spectrum and lead two of the nation’s largest and most influential states. Newsom and DeSantis almost certainly won’t face each other on any ballot in 2024, but in many ways, they are defining the debate from their corners of America as the presidential primary season gets underway.

Newsom addressed both his contempt for DeSantis and loyalty to President Joe Biden — even after Tuesday’s revelations that the president’s son, Hunter, reached a deal with federal prosecutors on federal tax offenses and a gun charge — in an interview just as the Florida governor launched a two-day fundraising trek spanning at least five stops across California.

The Golden State has become one of DeSantis’ favorite punching bags as he tries to avoid a direct confrontation with his chief Republican presidential rival, Trump, and the former president’s escalating legal challenges. “He’s taking his eye off the ball,” Newsom said of DeSantis’ escalating attacks against him. “And that’s not inconsistent with my own assessment of him, which is he is a weak candidate, and he is undisciplined and will be crushed by Donald Trump, and will soon be in third or fourth in national polls.” Representatives for DeSantis did not make the governor available for an interview.

Beneath the war of words, however, strategists in both parties suggest there may be a mutually beneficial dynamic at play. As they jab at each other’s policies and personalities through comments in the press and on social media, the governors are scoring points with their respective political bases, raising money and expanding their national brands. But it’s not all helpful. Newsom, in particular, is facing nagging questions about his presidential ambitions less than a week after DeSantis dared him to “stop pussyfooting around” and launch a primary challenge against Biden. The California governor, whose second and final term concludes at the end of 2026, has seen his national profile grow since he easily beat back a recall attempt in 2021 and cruised to reelection last fall.

He finished the midterm campaign with roughly $16 million in the bank. And in March, he channeled $10 million to a new political action committee he’s calling the Campaign for Democracy. All the while, Newsom’s team has been moving deliberately to avoid the perception that he’s running a shadow presidential campaign just as Biden ramps up his political activities. For example, Newsom’s new PAC is initially focusing on challenging Republican leaders in deep-red states that are largely irrelevant in the 2024 presidential race. He campaigned in Alabama, Arkansas and Mississippi in April on his first trip associated with the PAC.

Newsom is expected to avoid battleground states or key presidential primary states for the foreseeable future, his allies say. At the same time, the California governor and his team have been in regular contact with Biden and his top aides, including Jen O’Malley Dillon, who managed the president’s 2020 campaign and serves as deputy White House chief of staff. A Biden campaign official said the president’s team coordinates closely with Newsom. “Newsom is not going to run against Joe Biden and never would.

But life is long, and Newsom is one of the prominent national Democrats. It’s part of that role to have these big national battles,” longtime Newsom adviser and friend Nathan Ballard said of the feud with DeSantis. “There is the 2024 election, and then there is a 2028 election,” Ballard added. Indeed, veteran Democratic consultant Roy Behr, whose clients included former California Sen. Barbara Boxer, said the two governors are engaged in what could become an early preview of the 2028 presidential contest. “It’s not inconceivable that four years from now, these two guys could be their respective parties’ nominees,” he said. In tangling with DeSantis, who is 44, the 55-year-old Newsom is building his national brand and visibility and is “certainly trying to create opportunities for himself.”

Sacramento-based Democratic consultant Andrew Acosta said he expected the ongoing rivalry to continue given that it’s beneficial for both politicians with their core supporters. He described Newsom and DeSantis as “frenemies.” “They both get points off it,” Acosta said. “There is a hard core of voters on both sides who think this is great.” While polling shows that many Democrats don’t want the 80-year-old Biden to seek a second term, Newsom said there are no circumstances in which he would challenge the sitting president of his own party. “Not on God’s green earth, as the phrase goes,” Newsom said in the weekend interview, adding that he would be with Biden on Monday and hosting a fundraiser for him Tuesday. “I have been pretty consistently — including recently on Fox News — making the case for his candidacy.”

On Tuesday, Newsom reaffirmed his support for Biden shortly after news surfaced that the president’s son, Hunter, reached a plea deal with federal prosecutors on charges he failed to pay federal income tax and illegally possessed a weapon. “Hunter changes nothing,” Newsom told the AP, noting that he was spending the day with Biden. DeSantis did not plan to make any public appearances during his California fundraising tour, which included stops in Sacramento and the Bay Area on Monday and continues Tuesday with events planned for San Diego, Orange County and Los Angeles.

Over the weekend in Nevada, DeSantis noted that he’s seen a surge of “disgruntled Californians” moving to Florida. “Why would you leave like a San Diego to come to say, Jacksonville, Florida? I see people doing that,” DeSantis told thousands of conservative activists at a weekend gathering close to the California border. “It’s because leftist government is destroying that state. Leftist government is destroying cities all over our country. It’s destroying other states.” Former Nevada attorney general Adam Laxalt, who hosted the weekend event and leads the pro-DeSantis super PAC, said the policy contrast between the leaders of Florida and California is “a debate that our whole country needs to have.” “California has been the model for many leftist policies.

I would take the contrast between Florida’s policies and its results led by Gov. DeSantis and the California policies, any day of the week,” Laxalt said in an interview. “We can already see what leftist policies do.” Both DeSantis and Newsom took office in 2019 and won reelection for their second and final terms in 2022. While in office, both have been buoyed by multiple billion-dollar budget surpluses and the help of statehouses controlled by their own party that supercharged their agendas.

In California, Newsom expanded the state’s Medicaid program to cover all eligible adults, regardless of their immigration status. He signed a raft of legislation to make it easier to get an abortion, including authorizing $20 million in state spending to help people from other states travel to California. When the U.S. Supreme Court declined to strike down an abortion law in Texas that was enforced by private lawsuits, Newsom signed a similar law in California — only he made it about guns.

And earlier this month, he proposed amending the U.S. Constitution to institute what he called a “reasonable” waiting period for all gun purchases, a ban on so-called assault rifles, universal background checks and raising the minimum age to buy a firearm to 21. “I think Gavin Newsom is a very useful foil for Ron DeSantis, quite frankly,” said Lanhee Chen, a California Republican who attended one of DeSantis’ five California fundraisers this week. “The more kinds of crazy things that Newsom does — at least, crazy in the eyes of Republican voters — the more I think Ron DeSantis frankly benefits as somebody who’s seen as a counterweight to that.”

In Florida, DeSantis has leaned into cultural conservative issues in what he calls his “war on woke.” Earlier this month, his administration flew groups of migrants from Texas to Sacramento to draw attention to the influx of Latin American immigrants trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border. He did the same last fall, sending dozens of immigrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard, which he often highlights during his stump speeches. DeSantis also signed and then expanded the Parental Rights in Education bill — known by critics as the “Don’t Say Gay” law, which bans instruction or classroom discussion of LGBTQ+ issues in Florida public schools for all grades.

He seized control of Disney World’s governing body after the company publicly opposed the law. The Florida governor this year also signed a law banning abortions at six weeks, which is before most women realize they’re pregnant. And he took control of a liberal arts college that he believed was indoctrinating students with leftist ideology. While DeSantis does not have the legal entanglements that Trump faces, Newsom said Democrats may be wrong to assume the former president would be an easier candidate to defeat in the 2024 general election. “I see deep weakness — I refer to it often — weakness with DeSantis masquerading as strength,” Newsom said. “I think he’d be a more favored candidate.

But I’ll leave that judgment to more objective minds.”

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Inside the deepening rivalry between Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and California Gov. Gavin Newsom appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.