This seat, which blends portions of Kim and Calvert’s current districts, spans from Mission Viejo in Orange County up into Woodcrest, Menifee and Murrieta in Riverside County. The district was reconfigured under Proposition 50, the ballot measure that passed last year to redraw the boundaries of the state’s congressional districts. The new district includes pieces of the current ones represented by Kim and Calvert and is considered a fairly safe Republican seat.

President Trump would have won this district by 12 points in 2024.

Who are the candidates?

• Ken Calvert: Republican, incumbent member of Congress

Calvert, the longest-serving Republican member of California’s congressional delegation, is a Corona native who was first elected in 1992. He serves on the House Committee on Appropriations.

His legislative priorities, according to his district website, include strengthening the economy, fixing what he calls “our broken immigration system,” advocating for veterans and service members and coming up with solutions for California’s water issues.

• Young Kim: Republican, incumbent member of Congress

Kim was one of three Korean American women who were the first to be elected to Congress in 2020. She won reelection in 2022 and 2024. Kim serves on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, House Committee on Financial Services and House Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party.

Before she was elected to Congress, she served in the state Assembly for two years. Kim also worked for more than two decades for Orange County’s Rep. Ed Royce during his stint as a U.S. House member.

• Esther Kim Varet: Democrat, art gallery owner

Varet, who lives in Trabuco Canyon, has a Ph.D in art history, criticism and conservation from Columbia University. She is the founder and director of the contemporary art gallery Various Small Fires.

Her priorities include protecting reproductive rights, strengthening schools, combating climate change, immigration reform and rebuilding the country’s middle class, according to her campaign website.

• Lisa Ramirez: Democrat, immigration attorney

Ramirez, a Southern California native, is the owner and partner of U.S. Immigration Law Group. She attended Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and has a Bachelor of Arts from Scripps College in political science and religious studies, according to her LinkedIn profile.

Affordability is a cornerstone of her campaign along with immigration reform, climate stewardship, education and women’s health.

• Joseph Kerr: Democrat, retired fire captain

Kerr spent 34 years as a fire captain with the Orange County Fire Authority and served 17 years as president of the Orange County Professional Firefighters Assn., a labor union that represents more than 1,100 firefighters. He ran unsuccessfully for the Orange County Board of Supervisors in 2018, the state Senate in 2022 and Congress in 2024.

• Claude Keissieh: Democrat, electrical engineer

Keissieh is a U.S. Army veteran who served four tours in Iraq and later on a mission in Afghanistan, a small business owner, an adjunct college professor and an electrical engineer, according to his campaign website.

He previously worked with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to teach incarcerated people how to become electricians, his website says, and last year joined the California Department of Transportation as an electrical engineer.

• Nina Linh: Independent, nonprofit executive director

Linh started the WonderSeed Foundation, a nonprofit that uses neuroscience and technology to help at-risk youth, in 2018 after grappling with her son’s mental health struggles. She previously was a television producer and wrote a parenting book and a series of children’s books.

She’s running as an independent because she feels the “two-party system is broken” and the public is tired of hyperpartisan politics.

Democrat Francis Xavier Hoffman also is running.

Where they stand on immigration

Calvert for years has advocated for immigration reform, which he says must begin with controlling the U.S.-Mexico border to prevent people from entering illegally.

In 1996, he authored legislation that later became the E-Verify program, a tool used by employers to check the immigration status of newly hired employees. In 2023, he introduced legislation that would expand the use of the program. The bill, the Legal Workforce Act, was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary and the House committees on Ways and Means and Education and Workforce last year.

Calvert told The Times he favors passing legislation that guarantees a secure border and “ends the job magnet.”

“I support a system that rewards those who follow the rules and wait their turn, not one that gives a fast pass or grants amnesty to those who cut in line,” he said.

Last year, Calvert voted in favor of the Laken Riley Act, which allowed the Department of Homeland Security to detain noncitizens who have been arrested for burglary, theft, larceny or shoplifting. Kim also voted in favor of the legislation.

Kim has identified border security as a key issue in her campaign. She voted in favor of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which allocated $46.5 billion for border wall construction and additional funds for hiring Border Patrol agents. Calvert also voted in favor of the bill.

On her campaign website, Kim states that former President Biden “opened our border and purposely created a crisis that overwhelmed law enforcement and allowed deadly fentanyl to flood into our country.”

“It’s simple: enforce our laws, secure the border, no amnesty and put American safety first,” she wrote.

Varet supports the DREAM Act, which if passed would offer a path to legal status and citizenship for thousands of DACA recipients — undocumented people who were brought to the U.S. as children and given federal protections — and other undocumented minors, according to her campaign website. She also is in favor of legislation that would reduce green card backlogs, establishes a path to citizenship for people who have been in the country for a certain number of years, for people who have passed a background check and those who have worked in the agricultural industry.

She wrote that “undocumented immigrants already living in the U.S. and their children cannot and should not be removed other than for legitimate criminal justice or immigration law violation convictions.”

She supports providing a path to amnesty and providing funds to boost the number of immigration judges, consular officers and naturalization officers.

Linh, who came to the United States as a refugee from Vietnam as a young child, told The Times she supports “secure, orderly and lawful immigration.” She added that a functioning immigration system would protect everyone, including those who seek to enter the country.

“Real reform means a funded immigration court system, smart technology at ports of entry, and cooperation with origin countries on root causes. It means agents who identify themselves, follow the law, and are held accountable when they do not. It means a legal pathway that works, not one so backlogged that doing things right means waiting 15 years,” she said.

As an immigration attorney, Ramirez believes America should provide permanent legal status and a path to citizenship for Dreamers and immigrants who have contributed to the country for years.

“Our immigration laws need an overhaul and to be brought into the 21st century, giving workers more flexibility and options for people who are waiting decades to complete the legal process,” she told The Times. “In the meantime, we need to keep our communities safe from unlawful ICE enforcement while supporting effective community policing, accountability and trust in law enforcement…”

Kerr said immigration policies aren’t working, noting that it’s not simply a choice between “open borders and cruelty.”

He supports expanding immigration courts to eliminate backlogs, protecting Dreamers and creating a pathway to citizenship for people who contribute to the U.S., simplifying the process of legal immigration and boosting accountability for Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations to ensure enforcement is focused on real public safety threats.

“We can enforce the law with strength and we can do it with basic human dignity. These goals are not in conflict,” he wrote on his campaign website.

Where they stand on climate change

In 2024, Kim co-sponsored the Championing Local Efforts to Advance Resilience Act, proposed bipartisan legislation that would authorize $100 million annually over five years to help states strengthen infrastructure and prepare for extreme weather and natural disasters. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

In May 2025, Kim partnered with Rep. Dave Min (D-Irvine) to introduce the Building Resiliency and Understanding of Shrublands to Halt (BRUSH) Fires Act, which aims to boost wildfire mitigation efforts in shrubland ecosystems.

Kim and Calvert also co-sponsored bipartisan legislation to improve the health and resiliency of giant sequoias, which have been threatened by California wildfires.

But Kim also faced criticism from environmental groups for voting for legislation that reduces environmental regulations.

Calvert told The Times he favors focusing on “mitigating for a changing climate instead of imposing more taxes and regulations that kill jobs and make everything more expensive.”

He opposes California’s Cap-and-Invest program, which sets a declining cap on greenhouse gas emissions from major polluters, and believes the Trump administration was right to stop the state’s efforts to ban the sale of gas-powered cars by 2035.

The solution to climate change, Calvert said, is “water storage … better forest management to stop these catastrophic fires before they start and investing in infrastructure so we can better handle whatever Mother Nature throws our way.”

In February, Calvert announced he’d helped secure $67 million for Riverside County infrastructure projects, including several water-related projects, as part of an appropriations package.

On her campaign website, Varet said she will “demand responsible, science-based solutions” to protect the public and keep the country competitive.

She vows to support legislation that would hold large fossil fuel companies accountable for climate change, repeal tax breaks for the oil and gas industry and advance the transition to renewable energy.

“Pollution and climate change threaten not only our national forests but our health, our homes and our quality of life,” she wrote.

Linh told The Times she will push for mandatory modernization of utility infrastructure to prevent power lines from sparking fires, invest in forest and vegetation management and modernize water infrastructure and early warning systems.

On emissions, Linh said she believes “incentives and innovation will always outperform heavy-handed mandates.” She supports expanding clean transit options, incentivizing employers to adopt flexible work policies to reduce commute emissions, deploying smart traffic technology and giving small businesses tiered time lines and tax credits to transition.

She also vows to push for federal oversight of insurance companies that abandon fire-prone states like California.

“The climate crisis has become an affordability crisis,” she said. “People who were already struggling to stay housed are now one policy cancellation away from financial collapse. This is not an abstract environmental issue. It is happening to families right now.”

Ramirez supports policies that call for responsible energy development, innovation in renewable technologies, improving energy efficiency in buildings and transportation, and strengthening infrastructure to withstand stronger storms and higher temperatures. It’s critical, she said, to restore the historical function of the Environmental Protection Agency and reinstate protections for air and water.

“Environmental stewardship and economic growth are not opposing goals — they reinforce one another,” she told The Times.

As a firefighter, Kerr said he saw the effects of climate change firsthand. He supports funding for advanced wildfire detection technology, more resources for firefighters, strengthening incentives for homeowners to harden against wildfires, clean energy and climate resilient infrastructure and strengthening federal disaster relief programs.

The post Your guide to the California Congressional District 40 race: Orange County and the Inland Empire appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The proposal, backed by the Service Employees International Union Healthcare Workers West, would impose a one-time, 5% tax on individuals whose net worth exceeds $1 billion and who were living in the state as of Jan. 1, 2026. The goal is to generate $100 billion in revenue, which would largely be used to offset federal funding cuts to healthcare for low-income people.

“California’s health is at stake,” said Liz Perlman, executive director of a chapter of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, a major labor union. “Hospitals are closing and people will die. Why? So billionaires can get another tax cut that they don’t need.”

The California Secretary of State still has to verify the signatures and officially place the measure on the ballot. Backers say they collected more than 1.5 million signatures, well over the roughly 875,000 they needed. California allows ballot initiative campaigns to pay people per signature they gather. The cost of gathering petition signatures can vary widely, but it typically runs around $15 for each signature.

If the measure goes before voters in November, it could prompt one of the costliest ballot fights ever and will draw national attention as a litmus test for voter attitudes on raising taxes on the rich. An effort to oppose the tax has already raised millions and led to proposals designed to nullify the tax. Meanwhile, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has campaigned in support of the idea.

Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and Silicon Valley tech moguls are adamantly opposed. They warn it will drive California’s wealthiest residents out of the state. Nearly half of California’s personal income tax revenue comes from the top 1% of earners. Some have already purchased properties out of state in case it passes.

“After playing with matches since October the SEIU has succeeded in lighting a ‘Tax the Rich’ wildfire by getting enough signatures,” said David Lesperance, a tax consultant who’s advised some of his wealthy clients who left California because of the proposal. “The many billionaire targets of their efforts have already responded by executing fire escape plans by relocating to other states.”

Brian Brokaw, a longtime Newsom adviser who is leading a political committee opposing the tax, said the measure was poorly constructed and would deal a huge blow to the state’s budget.

“Enacting a so-called wealth tax in just one state wouldn’t target a small group — it would impact all 40 million Californians,” he said in a statement. “This proposal trades a short-term revenue bump for long-term losses.”

At least 25 billionaires listed among Forbes magazine’s 2025 rankings of the world’s 500 wealthiest people either lived in California or had some significant ties to the state, based on a review by The Associated Press. But determining whether they were full-time residents or just frequent visitors could turn into a matter of dispute, since many of them own property elsewhere.

The big tax and spending cuts law President Donald Trump signed last year will cut more than $1 trillion nationwide over a decade from Medicaid and federal food assistance.

The post Billionaire tax proposal in California is on track to qualify for the ballot, backers say appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

“He raped me, and he choked me. And while he was choking me, I lost consciousness. And I thought I died. I did not consent to any sexual activity,” Lonna Drewes told reporters at a press conference at the office of her lawyers in Beverly Hills.

Drewes said Swalwell, whom she met through mutual friends, “spoke repeatedly about his ability to make connections” to help with her software company. Drewes said she was also considering a run for Beverly Hills City Council at the time. 

In a statement posted online, an attorney for Swalwell said he “categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation of sexual misconduct and assault that has been leveled against him.”

“These accusations are false, fabricated and deeply offensive — a calculated and transparent political hit job designed to destroy the reputation of a man who has spent nearly twenty years in public service,” attorney Sara Azari wrote.

Asked if Swalwell thought the women were lying about corroborating evidence such as medical records that they had provided to reporters, Azari wrote, “We haven’t seen documents.”

A week ago, Swalwell was one of three leading Democratic contenders for governor, but his support quickly collapsed soon after the San Francisco Chronicle reported last Friday that an unnamed former staff member said Swalwell solicited oral sex from her while she was working for him and twice sexually assaulted her when she was too drunk to consent. 

CNN later Friday published the same woman’s account, as well as those of three other women, one of whom said he kissed and touched her inappropriately and two of whom alleged he sent unsolicited messages. 

Swalwell suspended his gubernatorial campaign Sunday night and officially resigned from Congress Tuesday. Gov. Gavin Newsom on Tuesday proclaimed a special election to serve the remainder of Swalwell’s term on Aug. 18. That person would serve through December; several candidates are already running in a June 2 primary election to replace him next January.

Drewes said she met Swalwell three times in total in 2018 and did not see him again after the third time, when the alleged assault took place. She provided reporters a photo that her attorneys said showed one of their meetings, during an opening of a Beverly Hills restaurant. The restaurant opened in late April 2018, according to news reports.

One of her attorneys, Lisa Bloom, said she would be filing a complaint with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office later Tuesday, which will include text messages between the two, journal entries in which Drews said she recorded the incident at the time and information about people whom she told about the alleged assault. Drewes also told reporters she sought therapy afterward at a center for assault survivors in Connecticut. 

This has been updated with a statement from Swalwell’s attorney.

The post Woman alleges violent sexual assault by Eric Swalwell: ‘He raped me’ appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Yee, a Democrat, had been one of several candidates seeking to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom in what has become a crowded and unpredictable contest. Despite the size of the field, no candidate has clearly emerged as a dominant front-runner.

Speaking during a virtual press conference, Yee said her campaign faced a tough reality as fundraising lagged and polling numbers remained low.

“The idea that voters are prioritizing experience and competence just hasn’t really played out,” she said. “That’s what I built my campaign on, but without the resources to stay competitive, it’s hard to see a path forward.”

Yee, who served two terms as state controller, said she plans to take some time before deciding whether to endorse another candidate.

Her departure comes shortly after another major shake-up in the race. Former Rep. Eric Swalwell, once considered a leading Democratic contender, exited the contest earlier this month following allegations of sexual misconduct. Swalwell, who has denied wrongdoing, is also facing multiple investigations and resigned from Congress soon after the accusations surfaced.

Throughout her campaign, Yee leaned into her reputation as a steady, no-nonsense public servant — even embracing the nickname “Boring Betty.” In a recent post on X, she framed that approach as a strength, writing that California needs “calm, cool, collected change” rather than political drama.

Still, her campaign struggled to keep pace financially in a state known for its costly media markets. Campaign filings show Yee raised just under $583,000 in 2025, far behind some of her rivals.

Although she has won statewide office multiple times — including seats on the Board of Equalization and as controller — Yee never gained broad name recognition among voters. She consistently polled in the single digits.

Even with her withdrawal, Yee’s name will remain on the June primary ballot. Earlier this year, she declined calls from state Democratic Party leaders to reconsider her candidacy amid concerns that a divided Democratic field could open the door for two Republicans to advance under California’s top-two primary system.

Under that system, the two candidates with the most votes in the June 2 primary move on to the general election, regardless of party. While Democrats dominate statewide voter registration, a fractured vote could, in theory, shift the outcome.

Yee dismissed that possibility as unlikely.

“Could it happen? Maybe. But realistically, this is California,” she said, adding that she believes the top-two system should ultimately be eliminated.

Despite her campaign’s challenges, Yee maintained strong support among party activists and previously served as vice chair of the state Democratic Party. At the party’s February convention, she placed second in delegate support with 17%, though no candidate secured the endorsement.

Voting in the gubernatorial primary is set for June 2, with mail-in ballots expected to begin going out in the coming weeks.

The post Former state Controller Betty Yee drops out of the governor’s race appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Assemblymember Carl DeMaio voiced strong opposition after his motion to stop AB 2624 — introduced by Attorney General Rob Bonta — failed to gain enough support. The bill has drawn attention from supporters of citizen journalism, who argue it could restrict the ability to share video evidence of alleged fraud online.

DeMaio said the measure could discourage individuals from documenting and publishing wrongdoing, particularly in publicly funded programs. He framed the proposal as a shift away from addressing fraud itself and toward penalizing those who bring it to light.

The legislation comes at a time when independent content creators, including online investigative figures like Nick Shirley, have gained large audiences by posting firsthand footage of suspected misuse of government resources.

According to DeMaio, the bill’s language could open the door for certain groups to request the removal of recorded material — even in cases where the footage appears to show misconduct. He warned that financial penalties could also be imposed on individuals who publish such content.

His attempt to stop the bill was intended to prevent it from advancing further this year. However, with that effort unsuccessful, AB 2624 remains under consideration as it moves through the legislative process.

DeMaio said he plans to continue opposing the measure, arguing it raises concerns about transparency and First Amendment protections.

The post California Democrats Keep Controversial Journalism Bill Alive appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

He said he would “fight the serious, false allegation made against me. However, I must take responsibility and ownership for the mistakes I did make.”

Swalwell’s campaign collapsed Friday soon after the first report in the San Francisco Chronicle, in which the unnamed former staff member said Swalwell solicited oral sex from her while she was working for him and twice sexually assaulted her when she was too drunk to consent. The account was corroborated with medical records and by people the woman spoke with after the last incident, which she said took place in New York in 2024.

CNN later Friday published the same woman’s account, as well as those of three other women, one of whom said he kissed and touched her inappropriately and two of whom alleged he sent unsolicited nude photos and other inappropriate messages on Snapchat.

Dozens of supporters and staffers quickly dropped their support for him. Major unions and congressional candidates pulled their endorsements.

It was unclear when Swalwell would step down, but he said he would work with his congressional staff to ensure they are able to meet the needs of his San Francisco East Bay district, where he was first elected in 2013.

Because he is leaving the race after a state deadline to file for or withdraw from a race, his name will still appear on the June 2 primary ballot.

The post Eric Swalwell to resign from Congress following sex assault allegations appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The legislation, known as AB 2624, recently advanced through the State Assembly with support from Democratic lawmakers. Supporters say the bill is aimed at protecting organizations that serve immigrant communities from potential threats or harassment. Critics, however, argue the language could have broader implications for transparency and public oversight.

DeMaio, a Republican representing San Diego, has been especially vocal, warning that the bill could discourage citizen journalists from documenting and sharing footage tied to taxpayer-funded programs. He has referred to the proposal as the “Stop Nick Shirley Act,” referencing online journalist Nick Shirley, whose viral videos have drawn attention to alleged issues within public services.

During a recent Assembly committee hearing, DeMaio pressed the bill’s author, Mia Bonta, over provisions that would allow individuals affiliated with certain organizations to request the removal of video recordings — even if those recordings were taken in public spaces. He also raised concerns about potential financial penalties for those who publish such content online.

According to DeMaio, those measures could be used to discourage investigative reporting by journalists, watchdog groups and members of the public documenting potential misconduct.

Supporters of AB 2624 maintain that the legislation is intended to improve safety for vulnerable communities and prevent harassment or intimidation. The debate over the bill’s impact on free speech and transparency is expected to continue as it moves forward.

DeMaio’s full statement on AB 2624 is as follows:

“California Democrats are trying to intimidate citizen watchdog journalists and protect waste and fraud happening in far-left-wing NGOs. AB 2624 can only be described as the ‘Stop Nick Shirley Act’ — a bill designed to silence citizen journalists exposing fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars.

Instead of fixing the fraud problems being uncovered, Sacramento politicians are trying to shut down the people exposing them.

AB 2624 would allow activists and taxpayer-funded organizations to demand the removal of video evidence — even if it captures misconduct in plain view — and threatens journalists with massive financial penalties.

That’s not about public safety — it’s about protecting powerful interests.

If this bill becomes law, the message is clear to every journalist in California: expose corruption, and you will be punished. AB 2624 is an unconstitutional direct attack on transparency and the First Amendment – and it needs to be defeated.”

The post CA Democrats Advance “Stop Nick Shirley Act” to Criminalize Investigative Journalism appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Taxing the rich to backfill Trump-induced federal funding cuts might sound like a no-brainer policy for the party’s left flank, which counts wealth inequality among its top issues. 

But despite a strong show of support from prominent national figures, including Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and liberal economist Robert Reich, the “2026 California Billionaire Tax Act” has become a hot potato for labor leaders.

The proposed initiative would levy a one-time tax of 5% on any resident of California whose net worth exceeds $1 billion, which applies to around 200 people, according to Forbes. That money would plug an estimated $100 billion hole left by federal cuts to Medi-Cal and other social service programs.

Publicly, prominent labor and progressive players have largely kept quiet, unlike Gov. Gavin Newsom who has aired his disdain loud and clear. Yet in private, some union leaders and their allies in the Legislature rail against the measure. Of the critics who spoke with CalMatters for this story — three union leaders and five members of the Legislative Progressive Caucus — only one lawmaker would criticize the measure openly. 

Critics question its feasibility and whether the state even knows how to accurately appraise a billionaire’s total wealth, a crucial step to evaluating how much tax they would owe. They fear long-term revenue loss by driving wealthy people out of California. And some resent that the union sponsoring the initiative, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, designed the measure to predominantly benefit its members rather than boost the state’s general fund, where it could go to all budget needs. 

“It’s not that taxing billionaires in itself is wrong,” said Keely Martin Bosler, formerly the top state budget officer to Newsom and former Gov. Jerry Brown. She is now a Democratic consultant who has advised several of California’s most powerful labor groups, including the Service Employees International Union of California, the parent union of SEIU-UHW. “The way in which this tax specifically is constructed is problematic.”

Many progressive state lawmakers and Capitol heavyweights, such as Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco and the powerful California Labor Federation, have sidestepped the question of whether they’d support it, declining for now to take a position on an initiative that has yet to officially qualify for the ballot. 

“The Labor Federation won’t take it up for an endorsement until July,” said Lorena Gonzalez, the organization’s president, in a text message.

Yet if the tax lands on the November ballot, as it appears on track to do, progressive critics will be saddled with the tricky optics of opposing — or at least not supporting — a measure that embodies one of their base’s core tenets: taxing the rich.

Even the mere threat the measure could qualify for the ballot has already spurred a torrent of opposition spending — more than $50 million in total so far — from billionaires such as Google co-founder Sergey Brin and cryptocurrency mogul Chris Larsen. Brin’s group, known as “Building a Better California,” has also spawned three new competing ballot measures designed to undermine the billionaires’ tax. 

Critics fear that if billionaires like Brin become even bigger perennial spenders in California politics, they could neuter the progressive agenda by bankrolling more business-friendly candidates and ousting left-leaning, labor-aligned legislators. 

But the measure’s proponents say they are undeterred by the secretive detractors and challenge their critics to put their names behind their words.

“What we have is a group of so-called leaders who are not reflecting the attitudes of their own constituents,” said Dave Regan, president of SEIU-UHW and the de facto leader of the billionaire tax measure. “That’s why they want to be anonymous.”

Regan said he’s confident the initiative will amass enough signatures to qualify for the ballot before the end of April. Then, he said, “We believe a lot of those people are going to come around and change because this makes sense, because the public is supportive, because their own members are supportive.”

The case for, and against, the billionaires’ tax

So far, polling has shown the billionaire tax is relatively popular with voters. Recent surveys show just over half of Californians surveyed said they’re inclined to vote for it. 

Critics point out that California’s existing state tax structure is entirely based on income, rather than net worth. The state would have to appraise each person’s assets, including real estate, art, automobiles and private and public businesses. The billionaires could pay in installments, handing over 1% of their wealth annually for five years.

Bosler said that with income tax filings, the Franchise Tax Board can use data from federal tax returns to verify its own analysis. Since there’s no federal wealth tax, California would be forging uncharted territory with no tax compliance support from any other source or agency — a risky move that could invite legal challenges. 

“The state is not a miracle worker, like, they’re not going to suddenly be able to do all of this like perfectly,” said Bosler. “I mean they will do their best, but I just think this is expertise that they have built up over 50-plus years. Like, none of this is in their wheelhouse at this point.”

But champions of the tax argue it is the only real solution on the table so far to save hospitals, health care jobs and, ultimately, patient lives they say are at risk due to federal funding cuts to Medi-Cal and food assistance programs. 

Supporters note that the tax is not intended to solve California’s structural budget problems. 

“It’s one-time funding to fill what we hope is a one-time hole,” said Brian Galle, a tax law professor at UC Berkeley who helped craft the measure. Galle said only around 200 people would be subjected to the tax, so the extra burden on the Franchise Tax Board wouldn’t be too great. 

“It’s not like FTB is going to get a blizzard of tens of thousands of new returns that they’re going to have to figure out a whole new data system for cracking,” said Galle.

Why some progressives aren’t on board

Those who have qualms with the initiative have largely kept their criticisms private. 

One liberal state legislator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the infighting among the unions puts progressive lawmakers in a difficult position. While he empathizes with the urgency that health care workers feel, he and other Democrats are not convinced the policy could withstand legal challenges and worry about the wealthy employing savvy accounting maneuvers to skirt the tax altogether.

Some organizations that are synonymous with progressive politics in California, such as the Working Families Party, also haven’t taken a position, even as other unions such as the Teamsters and AFSCME California support it. 

Even the powerhouse labor union SEIU California is choosing not to take a position on the measure, which is spearheaded by one of its local affiliates, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West. 

Assemblymember Chris Ward, a member of the progressive caucus, called the measure a “well-meaning effort by UHW,” but criticized the proposal for being just a one-time tax primarily benefiting the health care sector rather than boosting the state’s overall revenues. Regan said SEIU-UHW made the tax one-time to nullify the argument that it would push billionaires out of the state.

Ward noted that he and his colleagues are considering “superior” bills, such as one that would close a corporate tax loop to generate $3 billion per year, and another that would create a new tax on corporations that pay workers so little that they qualify for Medi-Cal and nutrition assistance.

Regan argued these measures would only make California more unaffordable, since businesses would pass their increased costs along to consumers. 

Ward, the sole state lawmaker who would candidly share his concerns about the initiative with CalMatters, said he and his colleagues have heard pushback from “a number of other labor organizations that don’t support that initiative,” primarily because its members would not directly benefit from any of the revenue. Uniting labor, he said, is the key to any successful revenue solution.

“There’s a need to look at a wealth tax for a more broad range, including health care workers but other purposes that are state priorities,” Ward said, “and that will be left off of the table if this is the only question we’re seeing.”

The post California billionaire tax is a no-brainer for progressive Democrats, right? Wrong. appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The two-hour debate will take place at 6 p.m Pacific time at a venue in the Los Angeles area that is yet to be determined. CNN anchors Elex Michaelson and Kaitlan Collins will serve as moderators.

The debate will air live across CNN, CNN International, CNN en Español and, for viewers without cable, on CNN’s subscription streaming service.

Participating candidates must have at least 3% support among likely primary voters in two state polls or an average of 3% across two polls that meet CNN’s methodology standards. The polls must be released between Feb. 1 and April 27.

The candidates must also have raised, contributed or lent to their campaigns at least $1 million, based on publicly available data from the California secretary of state.

Candidates from both parties are eligible to participate due to California’s “jungle primary” system, in which all candidates appear on the same ballot regardless of political affiliation. The top two finishers advancing to a November runoff, even if they are both from the same party.

Two Republicans, conservative commentator Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, are the leading candidates, according to a poll released Wednesday by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times.

The poll showed six Democratic candidates currently qualifying for the debate under CNN’s standards: U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell, former House Rep. Katie Porter, philanthropist Tom Steyer, former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra, former state Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa and San José Mayor Matt Mahan.

CNN typically does not carry debates involving candidates in statewide races, but the network believes that the California contest is significant enough for a national platform.

“One out of approximately every eight Americans lives in the Golden State and it is at the forefront of some of the most complex challenges of our time,” said David Chalian, CNN’s political director and Washington bureau chief. “California’s jungle primary system also allows for the debate to include a wide spectrum of viewpoints and proposals to tackle those challenges that will reverberate across the country in this pivotal election year.”

The post CNN will televise California gubernatorial primary debate in May appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Trump posted late Sunday on his social media platform Truth Social that he has known Hilton for years and called the conservative commentator “a truly fine man” who could turn around a state beset with notoriously high taxes. California, Trump wrote, “has gone to hell.”

“With Federal help, and a Great Governor, like Steve Hilton, California can be better than ever before!” Trump added.

The endorsement — coming about a month before mail ballots go to voters in advance of the June 2 primary — will help Hilton coalesce conservative support in a race with no clear leader. However, Trump is widely unpopular in heavily Democratic California outside his conservative base and Trump’s backing would become a liability if Hilton faces a Democrat in the November election.

With a large field, Democrats have been fearful that a quirk in the state’s unusual “top two” primary system could allow only two Republicans to reach the November general election ballot — Hilton and GOP rival Chad Bianco, the Riverside County sheriff. Trump’s decision — a strong signal to undecided conservative voters — will make that outcome less likely by helping Hilton lure additional support.

Democratic consultant Paul Mitchell called Trump’s decision “the safe bet” for Republicans. Rather than cling to a long shot hope that both Republicans reach the November ballot — or risk that both Hilton and Bianco fall short — Trump’s blessing should consolidate support behind Hilton and allow him to emerge from a large primary field and reach November.

“Having a Republican on the top of the ticket is essential” to drive turnout in critical down-ballot races, with control of the U.S. House in play,” Mitchell added. In an unpredictable, wide-open race, the smart play for the GOP is to “get one Republican on the ballot.”

There are more than 50 candidates on the ballot — including eight established Democrats and along with Hilton and Bianco, the two leading Republicans. An all-GOP general election is possible in California, which puts all candidates on one primary ballot and only the top two vote-getters advance to November, regardless of party.

Polling in early February by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found the field had broken into two distinct groups, with Bianco, Hilton and three Democrats — U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell, former Rep. Katie Porter and billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer — in close competition, with other candidates trailing.

In a statement, Hilton thanked Trump for his support and promised to grow jobs and bring down the state’s punishing cost of living. “Together we can turn things around,” Hilton said.

Republicans have not won a statewide election in California in two decades. Registered Democratic voters outnumber Republicans in the state by nearly 2-to-1.

The post Trump endorses Republican Steven Hilton for California governor, reordering wide-open race appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.