California already imposes some of the highest gas taxes and regulatory costs in the country. Those policies drive prices far above the national average. Then officials point to the high prices they created and use them to justify still more rules. Electric vehicles are heavy and burn through tires faster than gas cars. As the state forces more people into EVs, the same officials find new ways to raise the cost of keeping those cars on the road. It’s the arsonist-firefighter scenario: light the fire, then claim credit for fighting it. In their own bills, California politicians have celebrated high gas prices for boosting public transit ridership. The pain is the point.

Now comes another idea from Sacramento. AB 1421 would create a system that charges drivers based on miles driven. At 6 cents per mile, someone driving 15,000 miles a year would pay $900. That hits commuters, parents taking kids to school and practice, nurses, contractors, and small business owners hardest. Working families who cannot afford to live close to their jobs would pay more just to get to work. The bill does not solve an under-taxation problem. California does not have an affordability crisis because people are not taxed enough.

At the same time, Democrats advanced AB 2108, a bill that would expand diversion programs for retail theft when it can be framed as a “crime of necessity and poverty.” Nearly every Democrat voted for the version that reached the Senate. After voters passed Proposition 36 to toughen penalties for repeat theft and drug crimes, Sacramento is already looking for ways around it. Their message is clear: if you steal because you claim poverty, the system should treat you more gently. Ordinary people who play by the rules get to watch stores lock up merchandise and raise prices to cover the losses.

Because of Sacramento and local government far-left policies, California leads the nation in net domestic migration loss. Hundreds of thousands of residents have left in recent years for states with lower costs and fewer barriers. Population numbers have stalled or dipped slightly. Business starts lag too. California is the most regulated state in America by a wide margin. We have roughly 420,000 regulations, more than 120,000 above the next highest state, New York. The average business faces far more “shall,” “must,” and “prohibited” requirements here than anywhere else. A Public Policy Institute of California report confirms the state is an extreme outlier on these constraints, especially in environment, health, and commerce. States with heavier constraint loads tend to see fewer new businesses form.

As of early 2024, California recorded the nation’s highest unemployment, lowest job growth, lowest income growth, and highest poverty rate. The state budget faces ballooning deficits. Chief Executive magazine ranked it the worst state in America to do business for the tenth year in a row. For a long time California’s economy soared because the foundations of growth were solid. Those foundations have been steadily undermined by the same policies that raise costs, limit choices, and soften accountability for crime.

People are leaving, yet the Democrats “housing crisis” continues. New housing units have been added in recent years, huge condo developments and “affordable” housing are popping up everywhere you look. Did everyone take their housing with them when they moved? Who are they building all the housing for? Housing is expensive and scarce due to their regulations and sanctuary policies. 

Border towns in Nevada already joke about opening shops that sell the tires, lawn equipment, and light bulbs California makes harder or illegal to buy. The pattern is the same: more rules, higher costs on driving, fewer new businesses, softer treatment of property crime, and a steady outflow of people who can afford to leave.

Why do legislators and the governor keep adding layers of control and new ways to charge drivers when the results are so plain? Who actually benefits when everyday goods and the ability to drive become more expensive? If the goal is affordability and opportunity, why does every major policy choice point the other direction? And if hundreds of thousands of residents can leave without taking the housing stock with them, what does that say about the real drivers of the shortage?

California’s leaders act as if the state’s problems are mysterious forces beyond their control. The record shows otherwise. The constraints, the costs, the mileage schemes, and the crime policies are choices. People are responding to those choices by leaving, their family trees uprooted and planted in other states, their businesses enriching other communities. California is left to those who are dependent on government subsidies and/or government employment. 

Meanwhile, Florida under Governor Ron DeSantis just signed a budget smaller than last year for the fourth straight year. Despite similar populations, Florida’s budget is now less than half New York’s size. Its rainy day fund sits full and more than tripled from seven years ago. No state income tax. Property tax relief on the way. Strong population inflows. Better education rankings in key areas. Fiscal discipline that rewards results instead of rewarding failure.

Why do blue states keep expanding budgets that deliver shrinking value? What happens when ideology trumps measurable outcomes and accountability stays optional? How long can taxpayers and donors subsidize systems that absorb billions yet produce ghost students siphoning aid, declining real enrollment, and endless new asks for cash?

California community colleges illustrate the pattern in sharp relief. State spending on them surged under recent leadership. Billions flowed into aid programs and expanded services. At the same time, ghost student scandals exploded. Fraudsters deployed bots and stolen identities to enroll phantom students, draining tens of millions in Pell Grants and Cal Grants. The fraud quadrupled in recent years while legitimate enrollment fell and oversight struggled to catch up. Real students lost seats and resources. Taxpayers lost money. The system kept asking for more.

Santa Barbara City College serves as a local case study inside this larger failure. The college received a $20 million unrestricted gift from MacKenzie Scott in 2021. Reviews later showed roughly $10 million quietly went to support the SBCC Promise program despite repeated assurances that other funds covered it. The allocation lacked proper approvals. About $13 million remains after corrections. The intent was fresh impact. The result was backfilling existing operations at an institution that excels at seeking the next external lifeline.

Voters approved Measure P in 2024 to extend an existing tax rate and unlock up to $198 million for facilities. The campaign sold repairs and modernization without new rate increases. In reality the extension adds hundreds of millions more to the long-term property tax burden. Enrollment trends kept sliding. Maintenance budgets had been cut sharply earlier, helping create the very crisis used to justify the bond. Priorities included a costly new physical education building while core upkeep suffered. The SBCC Foundation, still sorting the Scott gift issues, contributed heavily to the pro-Measure P effort alongside construction interests positioned to benefit.

Why cut maintenance for years only to manufacture an emergency and demand more taxpayer and philanthropic dollars? How many accounting slips, priority flips, ghost enrollments, and ideological side projects must accumulate before leaders face shrinking budgets instead of automatic rescues? If high taxes, state appropriations, and major gifts from figures like MacKenzie Scott have not produced proportional gains in student success or institutional health, why expect the next round to succeed where previous ones fell short?

Florida proves a different model works. Smaller, disciplined budgets. Full reserves. No income tax. Property tax relief. Population growth as people vote with their feet away from high-tax, high-spend blue states. Education improvements without the same levels of waste and fraud. The contrast exposes the ROI gap. Blue state ideology and spending chase equity checkboxes and expanded bureaucracies while Florida focuses on results, safety, and fiscal restraint that actually delivers.

Santa Barbara and California residents pay the price in higher costs, visible failures, and repeated cycles of shortfall claims followed by bigger asks. The bigger picture shows the model is broken. Real accountability would tie every dollar to clear, measurable improvements with consequences for failure. Institutions and states that neglect basics or tolerate fraud should receive less support, not more. Targeted, transparent fundraising and results-driven governance would reveal genuine priorities far better than blank-check bonds or unrestricted gifts.

How much longer will taxpayers and donors fund a system that excels at consumption but struggles at delivery? Florida offers proof that restraint and focus produce better outcomes. Pray for leadership willing to break the blue-state pattern instead of repeating it. The evidence is in the budgets, the scandals, and the results.

In 2022, under Governor Gavin Newsom and Democratic legislative leaders, California became the first state in the nation to enact permanent universal free breakfast and lunch for every public school student in transitional kindergarten through grade 12, regardless of family income. This policy requires schools to provide two free meals daily to any student who requests them. The state pours over $1.8 billion in Proposition 98 General Fund money each year into the program on top of federal reimbursements.

Democrats frame this as compassionate progress but California public schools fail at their core mission. Recent statewide assessments show only about 48.8 percent of students proficient or advanced in English language arts and just 37.3 percent in mathematics. If schools cannot deliver high academic standards in reading, writing, and arithmetic, they have no business expanding into universal meal service for all students.

Policies like universal meals reflect the Whole Child approach that shifts schools toward government-managed social services. The result encourages dependency rather than self-reliance. Poor academic outcomes, combined with high taxes and living costs tied to expansive government programs, drive families out of the state.

California public school enrollment has dropped sharply, with a loss of nearly 75,000 students in the 2025-26 school year alone and hundreds of thousands since around 2017. Declining birth rates play a role, but migration from California to lower-tax states stands out as a major factor. Families leave due to failing schools, unaffordable housing, and the heavy tax burden needed to sustain these programs.

This migration drains the tax base. California loses billions in potential revenue each year as higher-income residents and businesses depart for states like Texas and Florida. Fewer students mean strained Proposition 98 education funding, which relies on enrollment trends, while overall state revenues suffer.

To manage the fallout from high costs and population shifts, Democrats expand government-owned and subsidized housing programs for low-income residents. Billions flow into affordable housing initiatives, increasing reliance on state support for those left behind.

Targeted aid already exists for families facing genuine food insecurity. Universal programs do not solve hunger. They shift responsibility from parents to taxpayers and add bureaucracy. California’s approach distracts schools from fixing failing classrooms while creating more opportunities for waste and fraud.

Plate waste remains a serious problem, with studies showing students discard 27 to 53 percent of served food, especially fruits and vegetables. California districts have faced their own issues with misused meal funds. Expanding government feeding programs statewide multiplies these problems at enormous cost.

Food insecurity belongs to parents, churches, food banks, and community organizations that can deliver targeted help. Schools should focus on teaching. When government assumes responsibility for basic needs like meals, it creates dependency under the Whole Child model that Democrats promote. This model sounds caring but redirects schools from rigorous academics toward government-managed social services. The result is more reliance on the state, not stronger, self-reliant families.

How much of that free food actually gets eaten? Waste data makes the answer clear: often a third or more ends up untouched. The policy nourishes bureaucracy and emotional appeals more than it nourishes children.

Democrats repeatedly invoke human needs—hunger, health, safety—to shield incompetent policies behind empathy. California’s universal meals program fits the pattern perfectly. Leaders cannot fix core education failures, so they expand government programs that waste resources, drive out residents, erode the tax base, and increase dependence on subsidized housing. Real improvement begins with demanding excellence in the classroom, not another layer of free meals that largely gets thrown away.

While Democrats keep yelling that democracy is dying and the black vote is slipping away, the real story from last night’s elections is a lot simpler. They are losing their iron grip on power, and minorities are starting to think for themselves.

In South Carolina, the state House just passed a new congressional map, 74 to 36. It wipes out Rep. James Clyburn’s district and sets up seven Republican seats and zero for Democrats. Courts shot down the old race-based maps that propped up these safe Democratic seats for years. Is this some attack on fairness, or just finally drawing lines based on how people actually live and vote?

Republicans in Georgia swept both open state Supreme Court seats. Charlie Bethel took 51.6 percent, Sarah Hawkins Warren grabbed 59.7 percent. Democrats dumped millions in, got Obama to endorse, and pushed hard on minority rights. It did not work. Black voter support moved noticeably right compared to recent patterns, even in nonpartisan races. One justice crushed it in Fulton County (Atlanta) way better than Trump usually does there. When big money and celebrity power flop like that, what does it say about the idea that black Americans are locked in forever?

Up to 19 members of the Congressional Black Caucus, nearly a third, could lose their seats in redistricting fights through 2028. The group that will not even let black Republicans join is watching its power base crack. It’s not about race, it’s about power for Democrats.

Minority voters in these areas seem more open to messages about jobs, borders, and real results instead of endless identity talk. If black Americans start voting their interests over party loyalty, is that a crisis for democracy or just voters waking up?

On the Republican side, the old guard took a hit too. In Kentucky, Trump endorsed Andy Barr for the open Senate seat. Barr smoked the McConnell-backed guy 60 to 30. Mitch spent 41 years building that machine. One Trump call and a smart offer later, it crumbled. About 20 percent of GOP Senate seats look set to turn over soon. Voters want America First, not the old club. When people reject machine politics, why do Democrats call it dangerous instead of democracy?

Voters also smacked down bad policy. In Oregon, a measure to repeal a gas tax hike is leading 82% to 18%! Democrats pushed it anyway while prices climb. When regular people overwhelmingly say no to higher costs on daily life, are they the problem or just fed up?

Longer term, the New York Times projects red states gaining big after the 2030 census. Texas plus 3 seats, Florida plus 2, Utah and Idaho plus 1 each. Blue states like California (minus 3), Illinois (minus 2), New York (minus 1) lose ground. People are moving with their feet away from high-tax, high-crime spots. If blue policies keep driving residents out, maybe the real threat to Democrat power is their own track record. If we stopped counting non-citizens for apportionment, the shift would be even stronger. Why fight that so hard? Democrats killed the golden goose.

Even in California, the panic is real. Gavin Newsom got asked about possibly having no Democrat on the governor’s ballot. He talked about agencies shaping the future and a “break the glass” plan for if Democrats get locked out. When the party that screams about democracy starts prepping bureaucratic backups against voters, what are they really protecting?

This hits especially close to home for Californians who have seen race-based map drawing up close. As someone who participated in the Citizens Redistricting Commission process, I watched firsthand how race became the dominant factor. Not communities of interest or shared economic realities, but raw racial quotas. The Supreme Court ruling in Louisiana v. Callais and the DOJ’s push to enforce it nationwide mean California must redraw every district where race predominated, just like South Carolina is doing. It is time to return to color-blind principles and actual neighborhoods instead of engineering outcomes by skin color.

Don’t forget California’s long history of voters getting overridden by liberal judges. Remember Proposition 187, where voters overwhelmingly said no to taxpayer-funded services for illegal immigrants, only for liberal judges to block it. Time and again, when the people speak at the ballot box on hot-button issues, liberal activist judges step in to nullify the will of the voters. Democracy?!?!

Democrats love to play games with deceptive ballot language too. Look at California’s Proposition 50, where the title and summary were worded to sound like they were protecting the independent redistricting commission when they actually handed power back to the legislature for new maps. Or Virginia’s recent redistricting amendment, which used loaded phrases like “restore fairness” to sell what critics called a blatant power grab for gerrymandered districts. Voters get tricked into thinking they are backing something neutral or protective when it is really about rigging the game in Democrats’ favor.

Democrats keep supporting and electing actual racists and antisemites, covering up massive voter fraud, and employing or electing Chinese spies. While they warn about threats at home, actual foreign ties seem to slide by if you are on the right team. Senator Jim Banks pointed out the pattern of Chinese influence around senior Democrats, staffers, volunteers, relationships that raise red flags.

Put it all together. Maps are getting fixed. Minority voters are shifting. Blue states are bleeding people and power. The old establishment is fading. Democrats are floating workarounds when elections do not go their way.

So here is the real question: When Democrats freak out about “democracy under threat” or losing the black vote, are they defending the republic? Or are they just mad that their reliable coalition is breaking up and minorities are not staying in line anymore? The votes, the moves, and the maps all point one way. People are not owned by any party and right now, a lot of them are choosing something different. Just remember whenever they say “threat to democracy” they mean “threat to Democrats”.

It is time we confront the truth: virtually every congressional and legislative district in California was drawn with race as the predominant consideration. What happened to civil rights hero Dr. Martin Luther King’s dream of a nation where people are judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin?

The Supreme Court struck down Louisiana’s congressional map for creating a second majority-Black district because race predominated over traditional redistricting principles. The Court narrowed the Voting Rights Act’s application, making it clear that states cannot engage in racial gerrymandering just to engineer “majority-minority” outcomes.

The DOJ, under Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, has now signaled it will go after every state doing the same thing. Illinois already paused its own race-based redistricting amendment. Pennsylvania’s maps are under scrutiny. And yes, California must be next.

California’s own redistricting laws tell a different story from the reality I saw on the commission. Under the state Constitution (Article XXI) and the criteria set by Proposition 11 and 20, the independent Citizens Redistricting Commission is supposed to follow a ranked list of requirements: equal population first, then compliance with the federal Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution, then respecting “communities of interest” (defined as social and economic interests that are not based on race or partisanship), contiguity, respect for city and county boundaries, and avoiding favoritism toward incumbents or parties. Race is not supposed to be the driving force.

During redistricting in California after the 2020 census race was elevated above everything else. To satisfy Voting Rights Act Section 2 claims about minority vote dilution, mapmakers treated the creation and protection of majority-Latino, majority-Black, or “coalition” districts as non-negotiable.

Communities of interest, actual neighborhoods, school districts, business corridors, or cultural ties that cross racial lines, were routinely sacrificed if they didn’t fit the racial quota. I saw it happen. Latino-majority districts were drawn like tentacles to capture enough Hispanic voters to guarantee certain outcomes, even when it split cohesive communities that shared far more in common economically and socially than they did by census category.

This is how California ended up with maps where race wasn’t just a factor. It was THE factor. And that’s exactly what the Supreme Court just said violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Last year I urged Californians to Vote No on Proposition 50 precisely to protect the independent commission from legislative takeover and to push back against this race-first approach. Prop 50 handed temporary congressional redistricting power to the Democrat-controlled legislature, a move that would have entrenched even more racial engineering under the guise of “compliance.” I wrote then that we must safeguard fair, community-focused maps instead of letting politicians draw lines to pick their voters by skin color. The Supreme Court’s ruling validates that fight.

Now the DOJ is stepping in nationwide. If race predominated in California’s maps, and every honest observer of the CRC process knows it did, then those maps are vulnerable to the same constitutional challenge that just took down Louisiana’s. We’re not talking about one or two districts. We’re talking about a system where every district was shaped by racial data as the primary lens. The result is representation that treats Americans as members of racial blocs rather than individual citizens and communities with shared interests.

This is the opposite of what Dr. King envisioned. “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Instead, California’s redistricting turned race into the central organizing principle of our democracy. It is time to return to the actual law: communities of interest first, color-blind principles, and districts that reflect how people actually live and work together.

The Supreme Court has given us the legal opening. The DOJ has signaled enforcement. Californians who believe in equal protection under the law, regardless of party, should demand immediate review and redistricting of any map where race was the predominant factor. The Citizens Redistricting Commission was supposed to be better than the old legislative gerrymanders. But when race overrides everything, it becomes just another form of gerrymandering with a different label.

Dr. King’s dream isn’t dead. But in California’s current maps, it’s been redlined out of existence. It’s time to draw it back in, one color-blind district at a time.

If Swalwell had won the primary with a Republican he would actually have a hard time in the general if this came out then but I don’t think as many would come forward and Democrats would be much more defensive and dismissive knowing a Republican would likely win the primary. It still is insane that they let him get this far and invested so much time and money into him.

Eric Swallwell will be on the June 2 primary ballot no matter if he drops out or not. With the history of people voting for dead or dropped out candidates in the past it will be interesting to see how many still check the box for him.

The big question is this: What if the Democrats finally stop the infighting and consolidate behind one of the remaining big names? Matt Mahan, Tom Steyer, or Xavier Becerra? The latest PDI voter file I pulled on April 12 shows the same registration numbers that make this race so tough for Republicans. A consolidated Democrat vote would change everything for the top-two primary and the November general.

Here are the current voter registration numbers from that fresh PDI report:

Total registered voters: 23,130,188

• Democrats: 10,390,052 (44.9 percent)

• Republicans: 5,793,065 (25.1 percent)

• Independents/NPP: 6,449,774 (27.9 percent)

Traditional non-presidential turnout is low. June primary around 28 to 35 percent (roughly 6.5 to 8 million votes). November general around 45 to 55 percent (10 to 12 million ballots).

Right now the Democratic field is still split, which is why two Republicans (Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco) are sitting near the top of many polls but Republicans do not have the votes in most scenarios no matter what the polls say. If they both get over a million votes and no Democrats get over a million we have a pipe dream scenario with two Republicans in the primary. But if the party machine rallies behind one candidate, that dream ends. I think there are three most likely consolidation targets.

Matt Mahan

Mahan has the most genuine grassroots support of the bunch. He is the San Jose mayor who actually gets things done on homelessness, crime, and cutting red tape without raising taxes. Silicon Valley tech donors love him because he delivers results. But his support is mostly Northern California heavy. If Democrats consolidate behind him statewide, he could pull in 3 million or more base votes in the primary. That would almost certainly lock up first place and push one of the Republicans into second. No more R-vs-R general. Mahan is a pragmatic moderate and would actually be a huge upgrade for California.

Tom Steyer

Steyer is polling highest right now among the remaining Democrats in several surveys. But call it what it is: he is a billionaire trying to buy the election. He has over a hundred million of his own money into ads, and that self-funding is what keeps his name in front of voters. If the establishment consolidates behind him, the money advantage becomes overwhelming. He could flood the airwaves and consolidate the progressive lane. In a unified field, Steyer walks into the top two easily. The problem for Democrats is he is still the rich dorky outsider who has never connected with the average voter.

Xavier Becerra

Becerra is the pure establishment pick. He is more like Swalwell the others. Former California Attorney General, former HHS Secretary, longtime insider who can be controlled by the Sacramento machine and the unions. He knows how to play the game and keep the big donors happy. If the party rallies behind Becerra, it is the safest choice for the insiders. No wild cards. He consolidates the loyal Democratic base votes without much drama. Polling shows him lower right now, but a full party push would change that fast.

Here’s the problem that will haunt Becerra: the Dana Williamson/Sean McCluskie scandal.

Dana Williamson, former campaign manager in his 2018 AG run and a longtime close political adviser, was federally indicted in November 2025 (along with Becerra’s ex-chief of staff Sean McCluskie and others) for conspiring to steal roughly $225,000 from one of Becerra’s own dormant campaign accounts. The scheme involved fake “no-show” jobs, falsified billing through consulting firms, and funneling the money to pad salaries while Becerra was HHS Secretary. Williamson has pleaded not guilty; McCluskie has pleaded guilty to related charges.

Becerra himself was technically the victim and was never accused of wrongdoing but the scandal has already scorched his gubernatorial launch. How did Becerra’s (and Newsom’s) inner circle, people hand-picked and trusted for years, orchestrate a years-long fraud on his own campaign funds right under his nose?

This is pure insider corruption optics, and it gives Republicans a ready-made attack ad goldmine in any general election. Even if Democrats consolidate behind him, this baggage doesn’t vanish, it becomes the story that follows him all the way to November.

If Democrats successfully consolidate, the math for the primary shifts hard against Republicans. Instead of Democratic votes splitting eight ways and letting Hilton and Bianco take the top two spots, a single strong Democrat could easily pull 2.5 to 3.5 million votes. That leaves the two Republicans fighting for one general-election slot at best. The historic R-vs-R November race that some are dreaming of would disappear overnight.

If one Republican makes the general, the November math is brutal. At 50 percent turnout the Democrat would start with roughly 4.7 to 5 million base votes. The Republican needs 2 to 2.3 million independent voters (65 to 75 percent of the independent vote) just to have a shot. That has not happened in modern California history.

Democrats are in control of their own destiny here. If they keep the field fractured, Republicans have a narrow opening for something historic in the primary. If the establishment does what it always does and consolidates behind Mahan, Steyer, or Becerra, the machine grinds on and another Democrat heads to Sacramento.

This is the same pattern I talked about with Newsom and Swalwell. The party protects its power, even if it means throwing one candidate under the bus or forcing others to drop out at the last minute or, in Becerra’s case, hoping voters overlook a scandal that reeks of the very insider rot he claims to transcend.

Will Democrats finally get behind one of these guys in time, or will the split hand Republicans their best shot in decades?

I knew the news was coming out Friday, but I was not ready for the speed of the collapse. Congressional Deadbeat Eric Swalwell, the guy who looked like he was steamrolling toward the California governor’s mansion, has been abandoned by his own party overnight.

Major unions that had his back, SEIU California and the California Teachers Association, suspended their endorsements and campaign activities the minute the San Francisco Chronicle and CNN dropped the bombshell reports. Four women, including a former staffer who says he raped her twice when she was too intoxicated to consent, detailed sexual misconduct, unwanted advances, explicit messages, and more.

Swalwell denies it all as “absolutely false” and politically timed, but the dam broke anyway. His staffers resigned, co-chairs jumped ship, and even House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries put out a statement signaling it is time to drop out (but not resign from Congress🤨). ActBlue even stopped taking donations for him. People who were defending him 24 hours earlier suddenly went quiet.

This was not some low-level candidate getting trimmed. Swalwell had the momentum. He was the frontrunner for governor with Gavin Newsom term-limited out. Donors were pouring millions into independent expenditure accounts supporting him, more than anyone else in the race in recent weeks. Independent groups backed by Uber, ambulance companies, dental and medical associations, and others had his back. He was weeks away from ballots hitting mailboxes, and the establishment machine was on autopilot for a Swalwell governorship.

The candidate pool is incredibly weak for the Democrats. Tom Steyer, the rich old white billionaire who has dumped tens of millions of his own money into ads, becomes the default favorite by process of elimination and current polling, but he is deeply unlikable and has never connected with establishment donors and Dem voters the way Swalwell had. Steyer might be a slightly less embarrassing alternative to the deadbeat congressman but he’s not as comfortable of a pick for low information tribal voters.

The hypocrisy here is glaring, and it is exactly why California keeps circling the drain under tribal politics. Remember Gavin Newsom’s own scandals? He had an affair with his campaign manager’s wife, his best friend at the time, while she was working for him and reportedly took advantage of her while she was intoxicated. The woman was painted as the villain, and Newsom’s then-girlfriend (now wife) Jennifer Siebel Newsom went on the attack, calling her the “culprit” with a “checkered history” and “bad news.” She later apologized after the backlash, but the party stood by Newsom. No mass abandonment. No sudden suspensions from unions or donors. They circled the wagons because he was one of theirs. Swalwell? Different story. He had the same kind of accusations swirling, plus the old Fang Fang Chinese spy baggage that somehow never ended his career. Yet now something changed.

My theory, and it is not conspiracy, it is pattern recognition, is that in establishment politics, sexual misconduct accusations are the perfect scalpel. They let the party surgically remove one of their own without triggering a broader corruption investigation that could take down more players. It is clean and targeted. No chainsaw to the rotting tree.

Look at Bill Clinton for the textbook case. The accusations against him went far beyond a simple affair. Juanita Broaddrick publicly alleged in 1999 that Clinton raped her in a Little Rock hotel room in 1978, describing a violent assault that left her lip bleeding. Kathleen Willey claimed Clinton groped her in the Oval Office in 1993, forcing her hand onto his genitals while she was a White House volunteer. Paula Jones accused him of exposing himself and propositioning her crudely in 1991 while he was Arkansas governor. These were not just “he said, she said” consensual flings; they involved credible allegations of rape, sexual assault, and harassment spanning decades.

Yet in the end the political process watered it down as much as possible. The independent counsel’s investigation, which started with Whitewater and other financial matters, pivoted hard to the consensual Lewinsky affair. Clinton’s impeachment by the House focused on perjury and obstruction of justice tied to his lies about Monica Lewinsky in the Paula Jones deposition, not the more explosive rape and assault claims from Broaddrick, Willey and others or any financial crimes.

The Senate acquitted him, and the establishment narrative settled on an ultimately “personal” sex scandal. Even many on the right largely let the heavier allegations fade into the background rather than press them as the central issue. It became a distraction that kept the spotlight narrow, protecting the broader Clinton machine and preventing a deeper unraveling that would have exposed more enablers, patterns, or institutional rot. The system self-preserved by narrowing the frame.

That is the scalpel at work. The establishment will not allow a large-scale scandal to unravel their control. If they just wanted to “thin the field,” they would have gone after a lower-tier candidate. Swalwell had all the momentum. This hurts them a lot, there has to be more going on behind the scenes.

The smart move for Democrats now would be to rally behind Matt Mahan, the San Jose mayor. He has not gone after Republican voters in his messaging so he will still be palatable for Democrats. He governs like a pragmatic moderate: results on homelessness with Shelter-First Policies and treatment (instead of Housing-First like Gavin and Sacramento) , cracking down on retail theft and crime, cutting red tape for housing and jobs, no new taxes, and an anti-establishment streak that actually gets things done. Silicon Valley tech donors have poured money into his campaign because he has delivered outcomes, not slogans. Most California Democrats can get behind him if they research even a little.

Republicans, of course, remain their own worst enemy in California. No unity, no clear vision, constant infighting. Voter registration gaps and disorganization make a statewide win an uphill battle even when Democrats hand them openings like this.

This scandal is a massive game-changer, but it hurts the Democrats far more than it helps Republicans. They were cruising to another puppet in Sacramento who would do anything for power. Now the field is fractured, donors are spooked, and the tribal machine has to scramble with very little time left. California’s downfall is not just policy failure, it is this exact brand of insider protection racket dressed up as “accountability.” The establishment always finds a way to protect the system, even if it means throwing one of their own under the bus at the last minute.

The question is whether voters are finally paying attention. Mahan had zero chance before this but now Democrat voters will have to actually look at the alternative candidates and I think at this point he is the King of the Fleas on a dead dogs butt.

Multiple women who worked as congressional staffers or interns are preparing to come forward with claims that he engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior, slept with some of them, and pressured them to sign nondisclosure agreements to keep quiet. Left-wing activist and lawyer Cheyenne Hunt says she is working with these women and the stories involve years of misconduct and abuse of power. Swalwell denies everything. He called it a false outrageous rumor pushed by flailing opponents and MAGA types. He said there has never been a single allegation or settlement and he never had a sexual relationship with any staffer or intern. Hit pieces like this would have sunk a candidate years ago but now they get shrugged off and his campaign just keeps rolling.

The judicial system in California offers zero help because it is packed with radical Democrats who protect their own. Democrat Judge Shelleyanne W.L. Chang in Sacramento Superior Court already tossed the residency challenge against Swalwell back in late March. She bought the story about him renting a tiny room in a supporter’s house even though the evidence showed it was shaky at best. Her Chinese-American background only reinforces my theory that China has chosen candidates here and the system shields them. The California Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal so Swalwell stays on the ballot no matter what. The whole process feels rigged.

Unions and special interests still have most of their eggs in Swalwell’s basket. The California Professional Firefighters, UFCW, and others back him because they want the same policies that sell California out to China. His Fang Fang spy scandal showed the pattern. She was a suspected Chinese intelligence operative who helped fundraise for him and placed an intern in his office back when he was climbing the ladder. He sat on the House Intelligence Committee while all that went on. It fits right in with Dianne Feinstein’s long-time Chinese spy driver and Gavin Newsom’s trips to China that locked us into more dependence on their batteries and EVs while he killed our oil industry. They sold our state to our biggest competitor.

When I found out China owned the Port of Long Beach through COSCO I was blown away but the Trump administration forced them to sell it back to an Australian group for 1.78 billion dollars in 2019. Swalwell would keep that sellout going. He barely shows up for work in Congress. He missed 82 percent of roll call votes from September 2025 to January 2026 and has skipped dozens more since his last vote on March 5. If he only claims a rented room in California what does he do all day? He is probably in his Washington DC house with his family or jetting around to LA mansions schmoozing donors instead of representing his district.

It is not much better on the Republican side. Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco have been going after each other for months with back-and-forth attacks that only get nastier as the June primary gets closer. I wish they would have focused on policy and their Democrat opponents. Most Republicans will choose a Republican if one is on the ballot even if they like someone else better. That is exactly why Democrat Matt Mahan is in a tough position and not rising in the polls despite the strong fundraising he has pulled together from Silicon Valley and record of good governance in San Jose. Republicans appreciate Mahan more than a lot of Democrats do but they will still vote for Hilton or Bianco in the primary which will keep him out of the November runoff.

The tribalism in politics today is worse than ever. Most Democrats will never vote for a Republican no matter what and most Republicans will pick their own party over anyone else. I’ll admit I’m one of those people who would vote for Mahan if there wasn’t a decent Republican on the ballot. I think Hilton and Bianco would both have their strengths but will also face recalls and lawfare from day one if they were to win.

If Swalwell somehow gets sidelined by these new harassment stories the Democrats will probably rally behind creepy Tom Steyer. The billionaire has already poured more of his own money into his campaign than all the other 20-plus candidates combined. He self-funds at a level no one else can match and the party machine will fall in line behind him to stop a Republican takeover. The top-two primary system means everything comes down to who consolidates their side first.

Right now the race is tight with Hilton and Bianco splitting the Republican vote and Swalwell hanging on among Democrats despite everything. California voters are stuck choosing between more China sellouts on one side and party-line tribalism on the other. I cannot believe we will more than likely have a governor worse than Newsom in November. The whole thing shows how broken the system has become.

A closer look reveals a pattern of supporting policies that funnel billions in taxpayer dollars into ineffective programs, benefiting special interests and political allies while delivering dismal outcomes for everyday Californians. From skyrocketing energy bills to pension fund losses and unaccounted-for funds in green initiatives, Irwin’s tenure exemplifies how Democrats maintain power through a cycle of fear-mongering, overregulation, and cronyism at the direct expense of working families, retirees, and small businesses.

Why, after trillions spent on Democrat-led initiatives in California, do we still face the nation’s highest poverty rate, unaffordable housing, and persistent homelessness? The answer lies in the misallocation of funds to ideological pet projects and nonprofit networks that double as voter mobilization machines, rather than real results.

Irwin’s oversight of climate policies has enabled this scam, justifying endless tax hikes and mandates under the guise of environmental urgency, only to see money siphoned off to globalist entities and left-wing activists. She is a key enabler of California’s fiscal and social failures.

Irwin chairs the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies, a role that places her at the heart of California’s aggressive green agenda. Under her watch, the state has poured billions into cap-and-trade programs, renewable energy mandates, and sustainability initiatives, yet emissions reductions are stagnant, energy costs have doubled since 2015, and blackouts persist.

Californians pay the highest utility bills in the nation while programs like the Solar on Multifamily Affordable Housing (SOMAH) deliver peanuts. A recent investigation revealed that out of $1 billion allocated for solar installations in low-income communities, only $72 million went to actual projects across 269 sites. The remaining $928 million was diverted to nonprofits like the California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA), which has never installed a single solar panel but pocketed $10.7 million in one year for “outreach” that amounts to door-knocking and building voter lists in disadvantaged neighborhoods.

CEJA’s sister organization endorses progressive Democrats, effectively turning taxpayer funds into a slush fund for party-building. The money trail leads to the Tides Foundation, a Soros-backed network that has received nearly $18 million from California since 2019, often for opaque “equity” programs aligned with Irwin’s priorities. This is just money laundering disguised as “oversight”.

Irwin’s committee monitors the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), which feeds these schemes, yet she has done nothing to demand accountability. Instead, her policies, like supporting AB 205 in 2022, impose new grid fees on solar owners, protecting utility monopolies while hiking costs for families who invested in green tech to save money.

Irwin has a direct role in funding the High-Speed Rail boondoggle. A prime example of Irwin’s wasteful spending priorities is her authorship of AB 1207 (2025), which she introduced with an urgency clause to take immediate effect upon signing.  This bill, co-sponsored alongside SB 840 (authored by now Senator Leader Monique Limón), reauthorizes and extends California’s cap-and-trade program rebranded as “Cap-and-Invest” through at least 2045, preventing its sunset in 2030. AB 1207 and the companion SB 840 lock in a minimum of $1 billion per year from the GGRF directly to the ridiculously wasteful California High-Speed Rail project through this extended period.

This commitment funnels billions more into what has become one of California’s most notorious examples of government waste and mismanagement. Voters originally approved high-speed rail in 2008 with a $33 billion bond measure for a full system connecting major cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Under Democrat leadership, including Irwin’s influence on climate funding streams, costs have exploded to current estimates of approximately $130 billion (with some projections reaching $135 billion or higher for the full Phase 1). Billions have already been spent over $15 billion to date yet no true high-speed track has been laid, only segments in the Central Valley plagued by delays, lawsuits, and massive overruns. The project is years behind schedule, facing funding gaps in the billions, and has lost federal support due to the fraud and waste.

Irwin pushed this through urgently, ensuring a perpetual taxpayer subsidy for a project widely viewed as a “train to nowhere” that benefits contractors, consultants, and political insiders far more than everyday Californians struggling with high gas prices and traffic. The biggest response from voters I’ve heard comes when highlighting high-speed rail as a key failure. It’s a sore spot symbolizing Sacramento’s disconnect from reality. By tying cap-and-trade revenues (raised through carbon credits and fees that drive up energy costs) to this failing mega-project, Irwin has helped entrench a money-laundering scheme disguised as climate progress, diverting funds that could address real needs like affordable housing or road repairs. The multiple scandals surrounding the “Train to Nowhere” and hidden by Newsom and the Democrats through NDAs and payoffs would make a great Hollywood movie.

If these billions were truly for combating climate change, why do low-income communities, supposedly the beneficiaries, still suffer from energy poverty and pollution hotspots? The “crisis” narrative is a convenient excuse to extract more taxes and redirect them to political insiders.

Irwin’s influence extends to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), the nation’s largest pension fund with over $500 billion in assets. As a member of committees overseeing budgets and taxation, she helps approve hundreds of millions in contributions to cover unfunded liabilities, while her climate oversight pushes CalPERS toward ESG investments. The result is an insane 71 percent loss of $330 million on the fund’s $468 million Clean Energy and Technology Fund, prioritizing “net-zero” goals over retirees’ security. A recent US House Inquiry questions if CalPERS violated its fiduciary duty, potentially jeopardizing tax benefits meant for pensioners.

CalPERS leaders, including Michael Cohen (Chair of Climate Action 100+, a WEF partner) and CEO Marcie Frost (frequent WEF attendee), align with Irwin’s agenda, investing in funds like TPG Rise Climate (tied to Chelsea Clinton’s husband Marc Mezvinsky) and Octopus Energy. These “green” bets support unachievable carbon caps that tax energy companies, sell credits to offset penalties, and cycle funds back into activist groups. It’s a money grab to justify perpetual spending, leaving pensions underfunded and retirees vulnerable.

How can Irwin claim to protect Californians when her policies risk the retirements of 2 million public workers, all while enriching elite investors and global forums like the WEF?

Irwin’s record is full of conflicts that show her prioritization of special interests. In 2019, she authored bills to weaken the California Consumer Privacy Act, exempting data types that would benefit companies like Ring, where her husband served as COO. She gutted protections for consumers, easing burdens on smart-device firms dealing with privacy scandals. She rarely recused herself from votes, raising ethical red flags.

More recently, her AI bill (AB 2013) drew opposition from Big Tech, but her history shows selective advocacy. For example, in 2024 she co-signed a Jewish Caucus letter on antisemitism, yet her climate alliances include groups criticized for anti-Israel stances.

Why does Irwin’s legislation often align with powerful lobbies, from tech giants to Soros-linked nonprofits, while ordinary constituents bear the costs of her failed programs?

California’s Democrats, with Irwin as a prime example, use “progressive” policies to create dependency cycles: promise aid for the poor, homeless, or environment, then divert funds to allies who mobilize votes. Despite record budgets, the state ranks last in education outcomes, with Black and Latino students struggling most. True systemic racism enabled by California Democrats. Homelessness persists despite $20 billion spent, and poverty tops the nation due to high living costs fueled by regulations Irwin supports.

Irwin’s bills, like AB 1408 for grid upgrades and clean energy mandates, sound progressive but have resulted in higher costs passed to consumers while benefiting connected nonprofits and investors.

For the average Californian and local governments struggling with skyrocketing energy bills and a pension time bomb, Irwin’s record shows a system rigged to maintain Democratic dominance. By perpetuating unachievable carbon caps, selling credits to polluters, and directing funds to activist groups and especially by championing endless billions for the high-speed rail disaster these policies create a cycle of dependency on government handouts and voter mobilization tools. As she sets her sights on Congress, we must call out these climate “crises” disguised genuine emergencies and excuses to grab more money and power, leaving California families to foot the bill.

Jacqui Irwin’s Key Legislative Actions (2014–2026)

AB 205 (2022): Imposed new grid access fees on solar owners, increasing costs for homeowners while protecting utility profits.

AB 1408 (2023): Expanded grid access for renewables, contributing to higher electricity rates passed to consumers.

AB 2013 (2024): AI transparency bill that faced Big Tech opposition but aligned with selective regulatory advocacy.

AB 1207 (2025): Authored by Irwin with urgency clause for immediate effect; extends cap-and-trade to 2045 and mandates at least $1 billion annually from GGRF to high-speed rail, fueling massive cost overruns from original $33 billion to ~$130 billion.

Multiple privacy bills (2019): Weakened California Consumer Privacy Act provisions, benefiting tech companies linked to her husband’s employer.

Budget and taxation votes: Consistently supported state budgets allocating hundreds of millions to CalPERS unfunded liabilities and climate programs. Joint Legislative Committee on Climate

Change Policies chairmanship: Oversaw cap-and-trade and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund allocations with minimal accountability for diversions to nonprofits. Utilities and

Energy Committee membership: Advanced renewable mandates and energy transition laws that doubled electricity costs since 2015.

Revenue and Taxation Committee (former chair): Influenced tax policies indirectly supporting employer pension contributions and green funding mechanisms leading to a pension time bomb that will harm California finances for decades.

Select Committee on Cybersecurity chairmanship: Focused on data risks to institutions like CalPERS but produced no major legislative reforms addressing pension investment transparency. The crisis has ballooned under her leadership.

Veterans and military-related bills: Sponsored several measures, often bipartisan, but are full of fiscal and climate controversies.

Subscribe now

Share

While no income tax would be ideal like other states are considering, California is probably far from that being a reality. Imagine instead of just writing a big check to Sacramento, we get to decide exactly where half of that money actually goes.

Not just “vote for someone and hope they do the right thing.”

No more “taxation without representation”.

Taxpayers choose.

Like managing your 401(k), but for your state income taxes.

That’s the idea behind the California Taxpayer Choice Act, a ballot initiative designed to give everyday Californians real power over how their tax dollars are spent.

Right now, we pay our state income taxes and then… the politicians in Sacramento decide everything. They can shift money from roads to pet projects, from schools to whatever lobbyist is loudest that year. We have zero direct say. It feels like handing our paycheck to a roommate who promises to “handle the bills” except we never see the receipts and the fridge is always empty. Even worse is that roommate is addicted to some heavy stuff.

The Taxpayer Choice Act is something I have been working on that would give us more control without blowing up the system. I wanted to create something that would gain as much support as possible so it has a chance of being a reality. I’ll paste the full bill below, I copied the format from actual bills that have passed.

How It Works

1.  50% We Choose Every California income taxpayer gets to log into a secure online portal (run by the Franchise Tax Board) and tell them: “Put X% of my 50% here, Y% there…” until it adds up to 100%.

2.  50% Legislature Still Controls The other half keeps flowing through the normal budget process.

3.  10 Clear Buckets We Can Choose From

•  Public Education (K-12 + community colleges)

•  Higher Education (UC and CSU)

•  Healthcare & Medi-Cal

•  Infrastructure (roads, bridges, water, broadband)

•  Homelessness & Housing

•  Public Safety & Law Enforcement

•  Environmental Protection & Climate

•  Transportation & Transit

•  Parks, Recreation & Culture

•  Economic Development & Job Training You just pick the percentages. Takes two minutes.

This isn’t “wild west” tax allocation. Strong protections are built in:

•  Minimum floors on the money taxpayers direct:

•  At least 40% must go to K-14 education statewide

•  At least 20% to healthcare

•  At least 10% to public safety

•  10% locked forever for debt service & pensions (can’t be touched) If people under-allocate any floor, the system automatically adjusts from the over-allocated categories. No essential service gets starved.

•  Lockbox protection — Once we direct money to “roads,” it can ONLY be spent on roads. Politicians cannot raid it.

•  Anti-raiding penalty — If Sacramento tries to steal or replace directed funds, the Franchise Tax Board automatically withholds twice as much from the legislature’s own discretionary budget.

•  Real-time transparency dashboard everyone can see online.

•  Citizen audit commission (no politicians allowed) that checks everything quarterly.

If voters approve the measure, the secure online portal would launch the following January 1st and integrate directly into the state’s tax filing system. Taxpayers could begin directing their share during tax filing season or by the following June 30. If you do nothing, it would default to whatever most Californians chose the previous year. We use current government employees to create the portal so we don’t have to have a large expense.

This isn’t about cutting taxes or raising taxes. Total revenue stays exactly the same. This about who decides.

For the first time, our actual choices (not lobbyists, not special interests, not whichever party is in power) will directly shape state priorities. Teachers, nurses, police officers, environmentalists, parents, and business owners all gets an equal voice with their own tax dollars.

And because of the guardrails, the sky won’t fall. Essential services stay protected, politicians can’t play games, and everything is audited and public.

We already get to choose how our 401(k) is invested.

We get to choose how our charitable donations are spent.

Why shouldn’t we have a direct say over the biggest compulsory payment most of us make every year, our state taxes?

The California Taxpayer Choice Act puts power back where it belongs: with the people who earn the money in the first place.

This would also make it clear to politicians what our priorities are.

If this idea excites you, share it. Talk about it. Help get it on the ballot. Send to your state legislators, I don’t mind if someone else puts their name on it. California taxpayers have waited long enough for a real voice.

Comment

Subscribe

California Taxpayer Choice Act

A Proposition to Amend the California Constitution and Revenue and Taxation Code

Section 1. Title

This act shall be known as the “California Taxpayer Choice Act.”

Section 2. Findings and Declarations

The people of California find and declare:

(a) Taxpayers deserve direct control over how their state income tax dollars are spent, similar to managing a 401(k) retirement plan.

(b) Transparent, voter-directed allocation promotes fiscal accountability and prevents misuse of funds.

(c) Guardrails are necessary to ensure essential government functions, prevent political manipulation, and maintain budgetary stability.

Section 3. Purpose

This act establishes a “Taxpayer Allocation Portal” allowing individual income taxpayers to direct the allocation of 50% of their state income tax liability across predefined spending categories, with the remaining 50% allocated by the Legislature under existing law. Robust guardrails protect minimum funding floors, prohibit reallocation by politicians, and ensure audit transparency.

Section 4. Addition to California Constitution – Article XIII E

Article XIII E. Taxpayer-Directed State Spending

§1. Taxpayer Allocation Right

Every California income taxpayer may annually direct, via a secure online portal administered by the Franchise Tax Board (FTB), the allocation of 50% of their state income tax liability (after credits) among the categories in §3. The remaining 50% shall be allocated by the Legislature.

§2. Mandatory Minimum Funding Floors

No category shall receive less than the following percentages of total directed funds (aggregated statewide):

•  Public Education (K-14): 40%

•  Healthcare & Medi-Cal: 20%

•  Public Safety & Law Enforcement: 10%

•  Debt Service & Pension Obligations: 10% (locked; non-reallocable)

If aggregate taxpayer choices fall below a floor, the shortfall is proportionally deducted from categories exceeding their proportional share.

§3. Spending Categories (Taxpayers Choose % for Each, Totaling 100% of Their Directed 50%)

1.  Public Education (K-14) – Schools, community colleges, teacher salaries

2.  Higher Education (UC/CSU) – Universities, research, student aid

3.  Healthcare & Medi-Cal – Hospitals, public health, senior care

4.  Infrastructure – Roads, bridges, water systems, broadband

5.  Homelessness & Housing – Shelters, affordable housing, mental health services

6.  Public Safety & Law Enforcement – Police, fire, courts, prisons

7.  Environmental Protection & Climate – Clean air/water, wildfire prevention, conservation

8.  Transportation & Transit – Highways, rail, public buses, EV charging

9.  Parks, Recreation & Culture – State parks, museums, libraries

10.  Economic Development & Job Training – Small business grants, workforce programs

§4. Guardrails Against Political Manipulation

(a) Lockbox Protection: Funds directed to a category are legally restricted to that category’s statutory definition. No legislative reallocation allowed.

(b) Anti-Raiding Clause: Politicians may not borrow, transfer, or supplant directed funds. Any attempt triggers automatic FTB withholding of legislative discretionary budgets by 200% of the raided amount.

(c) Transparency Dashboard: Real-time public dashboard (updated daily) shows aggregate taxpayer choices vs. actual spending.

(d) Independent Auditor: A 5-member Citizen Audit Commission (appointed by Controller, no elected officials) conducts quarterly audits. Violations trigger immediate fund freezes.

(e) Category Definitions Locked: Statutory definitions of categories may only be amended by ⅔ vote of both houses + voter approval.

(f) Emergency Override: Governor may suspend allocations for 90 days in declared emergencies; requires ⅔ legislative approval to extend.

Section 5. Implementation

(a) Taxpayer Allocation Portal launches January 1, (2027?), integrated into FTB’s CalFile system.

(b) Taxpayers allocate via dropdown percentages (0–100%, totaling 100%) during tax filing or by June 30.

(c) Default allocation = proportional to prior year’s aggregate taxpayer choices.

(d) FTB certifies allocations by August 31; Controller disburses by September 30.

Section 6. Severability

If any provision is held invalid, the remainder remains in effect.

Section 7. Effective Date

This act takes effect for tax year (2027?) (filed in 2028?).

Ballot Summary (for voter pamphlet)

TAXPAYER CHOICE ACT. Lets taxpayers direct 50% of their state income taxes to 10 categories (education, healthcare, infrastructure, etc.) via online portal. Locks 50% for Legislature. Sets minimum funding floors (40% education, 20% healthcare, etc.). Prohibits politicians from touching directed funds. Requires real-time transparency and citizen audits.

Fiscal Impact: No net change in revenue. Shifts spending control from politicians to taxpayers with safeguards for essential services.

The Democrats who run the Santa Barbara Independent continue their pattern of one-sided reporting that shields lawbreakers and demonizes federal agents doing their jobs. This is just another election cycle evolution meant to get out the vote for the Democrat Party whose solution for everything just happens Communism… oh and demonizing, defunding and disarming Law Enforcement. They will sacrifice the safety of their own communities to retain power and grow dependency.

In the February 20, 2026, ICE arrest on Carrillo Street, the full eight-minute video shows a man approach the unmarked Dodge Charger, crouch down, and clearly interact with the rear right tire. Moments later the tire goes flat. Santa Barbara police confirmed the tire was slashed, a federal crime involving destruction of government property. Yet the Senior Editor for the SB Independent described the act as the man simply “appearing to briefly touch the tire” and called the event a “violent ICE arrest.”

The story focuses almost entirely on the 80-year-old attorney who yelled insults, tried to grab a backpack during the arrest, and got pepper-sprayed. It barely mentions the crowd that surrounded the two agents for eight minutes, screaming, honking, whistling, and interfering as they tried to secure their suspect and damaged vehicle. This is propaganda that flips aggressors into victims and federal officers into villains.

The same pattern appeared during the July 2025 raids at Glass House Farms in Carpinteria and Camarillo. Federal agents arrested 361 illegal workers and rescued at least 14 migrant children from potential forced labor, exploitation, and human trafficking at the cannabis operations.

Protesters mobbed agents as they left, throwing rocks that shattered vehicle windows and windshields. Video shows one raid supporter getting sucker-punched from behind, then swarmed and taken down by the crowd with no arrests for the assault. Local leftist media stayed quiet on the child labor discoveries and vehicle attacks. Outlets like the Independent highlighted smoke bombs used by agents, minor protester injuries, and complaints from politicians denied entry. Serious crimes against workers and federal property vanished from the coverage.

These local activist groups function like a less organized version of ANTIFA, using similar tactics to obstruct immigration enforcement under the banner of “community defense.” ANTIFA in Portland mastered black-bloc anonymity, umbrella squads to block cameras, assaults on citizen journalists, and nightly riots that created no-go zones.

Local Santa Barbara and Ventura County activist crowds form fast through alert networks and hotlines. The results are similar: surround agents, damage federal vehicles, assault bystanders, then rely on friendly press to spotlight law enforcement force while downplaying or ignoring mob violence.

This “film the police, ignore the antagonists” approach keeps the myth alive that these groups are peaceful. Federal agents face constant risks enforcing laws local politicians ignore. Real victims like trafficked children at Glass House and ordinary citizens and curious journalists assaulted by mobs get erased. Local law enforcement, controlled by the same radical officials, is sidelined by policies that limit response and recording.

Taxpayer dollars fund groups that organize against federal enforcement. 805 UndocuFund runs an emergency fund for undocumented families hit by ICE, operates a hotline for sightings, and coordinates the 805 Immigrant Rapid Response Network.

In October 2025, the Santa Barbara City Council awarded it $100,000 from the City’s Immigrant Relief Fund for financial aid amid rising enforcement. Earlier in August 2025, the council approved a $500,000 package for immigrant support services, much of it going to similar nonprofits. These are local taxpayer funds used to counter lawful federal operations.

VC Defensa serves as the Ventura County counterpart, running a hotline (805-296-1119) to report ICE activity, dispatching volunteers to document encounters, and building defense strategies. The group benefits from collaboration with funded entities like 805 UndocuFund, joint networks, and broader city-county immigrant relief funding that supports staff hiring, training, and sustained operations.

Unlike Portland ANTIFA, which relied on crowdfunding and private donors to avoid scrutiny tied to its anarchist image, local groups present as legitimate nonprofits offering “humanitarian” aid. This makes them acceptable for city councils to fund with public money under labels like community relief. Yet the outcomes align with ANTIFA: disrupt federal operations, form crowds via hotlines, damage vehicles, assault bystanders, then use sympathetic media to frame law enforcement response as excessive. Taxpayer subsidies provide payroll, hotlines, and rapid mobilization.

This creates a perverse incentive. Local politicians subsidize resistance to federal law, shielding illegal activity like harboring undocumented workers at raided sites with child labor issues while escalating tensions leading up to the next election. It erodes the rule of law when cities pay groups whose main function is to obstruct federal agents enforcing immigration statutes. Outlets like the Independent rarely mention these funding ties, preferring to depict protesters as spontaneous defenders rather than partially taxpayer-supported operatives.

This selective silence fuels narratives that downplay mob violence and amplify claims against authorities, backed by local government checks and it’s all goes back to them getting out the vote for the next election. They need the youth to be mobilized and they need their base to be active, they must distract from their poor governance and growth of the administrative state. The more dependents they can create the safer they become.

The Independent and similar outlets bear real responsibility for this chaos. By consistently minimizing vandalism, assaults, and human trafficking while amplifying every claim of excessive force, they tear apart community trust and invite more anarchy.

ANTIFA Context:

1. Portland Antifa telling compliant press not to film during riot activities (Nov 2020):
A protester directly says, “If you want to be a journalist, don’t film the protestors,” while others engage in public criminal acts. This clip highlights demands to avoid recording identifiable actions.


Video: https://x.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1323529371513053185


2. Antifa encampment confrontation – demanding stop filming because “some people don’t have their masks on yet” (June 2025):
Militants emerge to confront a journalist filming near an ICE-related encampment, insisting recording stop due to unmasked individuals (common privacy/anonymity concern in these groups). The filmer declines and captures the exchange.


Video: https://x.com/Honeybadgermom/status/1935536386620502232

3. Protester yelling at filmer to stop during activity they don’t want recorded (Jan 2026):
Someone is heard yelling “back the f*** up” and asking to stop filming amid actions they prefer hidden.


Video: https://x.com/NotTinaKotex/status/2015335105078972591

4. Additional context from Portland/Charlottesville-era reports (2018–2020):
Multiple accounts captured Antifa-linked protesters swatting cameras, covering lenses, or shouting “stop filming” at journalists. Similar in Portland where activists demanded no recording of “direct actions.”

Report:

https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/8/12/17681986/antifa-leftist-violence-clashes-protests-charlottesville-dc-unite-the-right

In California's latest CAASPP assessments for 2024-25, only about 48.8 percent of all students are meeting or exceeding standards in English language arts. When you zoom in on stats for black and brown kids, it’s a disaster. For Black students, that number is 32.8 percent, and for Hispanic or Latino students, it’s 38.8 percent. 

More than two-thirds of these kids aren’t proficient in reading by the time they’re tested. Recent gains are tiny, like 2.4 points for Black students from the previous year. Why? Because the state has lowered standards to hide the mess, all while patting itself on the back for “equity.” Meanwhile, these children are set up to struggle in math, science, history, you name it. If you can’t read the problem, how are you supposed to solve it?

In Ventura Unified, Hispanic/Latino students are at around 38 percent proficiency in English language arts, and Black students are around 30 percent. These are supposed to be progressive areas with resources and good intentions. Overall elementary reading proficiency hovers around 49 percent in most recent data, showing minority groups lagging behind. 

Santa Barbara County Unified School celebrated hitting 51.7 percent overall in literacy but the gaps for Hispanic and Latino kids are huge. Only about a third met standards based on breakdowns showing massive disparities. Is this what progress looks like? Or is it just another way to keep disadvantaged families in cycles of poverty?

One of the biggest culprits on the Central Coast is the push for dual-language programs, especially for English learners. In California, schools get extra funding for students classified as English learners, which creates a perverse incentive to keep kids in ESL or bilingual tracks longer than necessary. The state pours money into these programs, like grants under the Dual Language Immersion Grant and the Global California 2030 initiative. Ironically it’s immersion in Spanish, not English, for most students. 

During COVID, when kids were already struggling, Santa Barbara Unified turned McKinley Elementary into a dual-language immersion program. They sold it as inclusive, but it robbed those Latino children of the full English immersion they desperately needed. Many of these kids go home to families and friends who speak Spanish, so school should be the place where they dive headfirst into English. Instead, this model splits time between languages, which mostly benefits the few English speakers learning Spanish as a second language. The rest fall further behind because California makes it easy to function without learning English. 

English Learners in California spend the same four years in high school as their native English-speaking peers, grinding through the same schedule and supposedly the same prep, yet many walk away without completing the full A-G course requirements needed for direct admission to UC or CSU campuses. Their diploma is worth less, their time is wasted.

Statewide data shows that while about 53.9 percent of all graduates meet these college-prep standards, English Learners lag dramatically behind, often with college and career readiness rates hovering around 17 percent or lower for current ELs, compared to much higher figures for non-EL students. 

This creates systemic barriers like delayed access to English courses, over-reliance on ESL classes that don’t always count toward A-G, and programs that prioritize “equity” over actual preparation. These students graduate with the same diploma on paper but need extra work in college just to get on level ground with their classmates who were immersed in the language from day one.

When I took French in school, my teacher didn’t speak a word of English for over a month. I spent weeks in Mexico with my wife’s family and none of them spoke English. It was sink or swim, and it forced me to learn fast. I had to figure out how to communicate, ask questions, and express myself instantly. That immersion worked wonders; I picked up the languages quickly and built confidence. Why aren’t we doing the same for children in California? Why deny them that intensive English focus, starting with solid phonics to crack the code, when it’s proven to accelerate learning? Dual-language might sound culturally sensitive, but in practice, it’s holding kids back from the tools they need to thrive in an English-dominant world.

In Mississippi, a red state, major progress has been achieved. They’ve implemented strict reforms since 2013, like the Literacy-Based Promotion Act, which requires third graders to pass a reading test or repeat the grade. Mississippi children who lag or miss school days in some cases are pushed to attend after-school sessions or Saturday school. If they fail the reading test twice, they are pressed to attend summer school and will get one final chance to pass before fourth grade begins. If they fail that last chance, they normally must repeat third grade. 

Along with immersion proper reading instruction starts with phonics, the systematic teaching of how letters and groups of letters connect to sounds. Research from decades of studies shows that phonics is essential for kids to decode words, build fluency, and ultimately comprehend what they’re reading. Without it, children guess at words using pictures or context, which fails especially hard for children who need strong decoding skills to catch up. 

Phonics unlocks the code of written language, helping them sound out unfamiliar words independently. Systematic phonics instruction leads to better reading and spelling outcomes for beginning readers and struggling students alike, far more than California’s approaches that downplay it in favor of whole language or “balanced” methods that let kids guess.

The push for real change in California’s reading instruction died on January 31, 2026 in the California legislature with Assembly Bill 1121, introduced by Assemblywoman Blanca Rubio. This legislation would have required schools statewide to adopt methods grounded in the “science of reading,” putting a strong emphasis on explicit, systematic phonics along with other key skills to help kids decode and understand text properly.

A nearly identical bill died last year in the Assembly without even getting a full hearing, thanks to heavy opposition from the California Teachers Association and advocates for English learners. They claimed that a phonics-heavy approach isn’t suitable or effective for students who aren’t yet fluent in English, arguing it shouldn’t be mandated across the board and that teachers need more flexibility to meet diverse needs.

It’s frustrating to see resistance like this when the evidence shows explicit phonics works wonders for struggling readers, including many black and brown kids and English learners who desperately need that structured foundation to catch up. Instead of embracing proven methods, these groups blocked progress.

Mississippi’s early reforms focused on reading, but math scores rose as well: Perhaps when students can read, they enjoy school more and so thrive in other subjects as well. No lowering standards to mask failure; they push kids to succeed. The key to their success was embracing the science of reading, with heavy emphasis on phonics instruction and teacher training in evidence-based methods. Mississippi jumped from 49th to 9th in fourth-grade reading nationwide. 

A Black Mississippi child is two and a half times as likely to be proficient in reading by fourth grade as a Black California child. Low-income children are more likely to test proficient in reading in Mississippi or Louisiana than in California, Massachusetts or New York. A low-income fourth grader is almost twice as likely to test proficient at math in Mississippi as in Oregon. As test scores rose, poverty levels dropped, along with teen motherhood, incarceration, and arrest rates. Mississippi’s early focus was on reading, but math scores rose too because once kids can read, they enjoy school more and thrive in other subjects. 

It’s not for lack of funding in California. Far from it. California spends an incredible amount per student, around $25,941 annually, which is more than double Mississippi’s roughly $12,394 per pupil. Yet the results are terrible, with black and brown kids lagging far behind. It’s not about money, it’s about priorities. California pours resources into programs that create activists instead of scholars, lowering expectations and avoiding real accountability.

Why is California, “the 4th largest economy in the world,” ok with these poor outcomes? They’ve reduced graduation requirements, stopped teaching algebra in eighth grade, and adopted “equitable grading” that lets kids retake tests endlessly without penalties. Mississippi takes the opposite approach: extra help for disadvantaged kids, but on the same terms as everyone else, preparing them for the real world with proven phonics-based instruction.

If California claims to care about equity, why do they incentivize keeping disadvantaged kids in under performing ESL programs instead of immersing them in English with strong phonics foundations? Is lowering standards really helping, or is it just a way to avoid accountability while these children pay the price? 

How can they justify celebrating tiny gains when two-thirds of minority students can’t read at grade level? Why aren’t they learning from Mississippi’s success, where raising expectations and prioritizing phonics has led to real poverty reduction? The real systemic racism isn’t discrimination, but policies that doom generations to failure and poverty under the guise of compassion. 

Our communities deserve better: real immersion in English, high standards with explicit phonics instruction, and accountability that actually works. If Mississippi can turn it around despite its challenges, California has no excuse. 

In my Substack titled “Democrats Human Shields..” , I laid out how Democrats use vulnerable groups as human shields to deflect from their failed policies. I focused on areas like education, healthcare, and criminal justice reform. I forgot to add immigration, but this year’s events make it the cause de jour. With nationwide ICE protests and student walkouts erupting, it fits the pattern perfectly.

Progressive Democrats rally their base around flashpoints they often create themselves, like open borders leading to chaos, then blame everyone else when enforcement steps in.

They fire up their supporters with the same recycled issues: climate change, racism in America, immigration, abortion, and more. They even blend them into absurd hybrids, such as “climate racism,” where environmental problems somehow hit minorities hardest because of systemic bias.

These causes stir emotions and keep the base energized for votes and donations.

My own story started in college, when progressives pushed many of us to back Obama purely on race. It felt historic, but looking back, it was just manipulation dressed up as progress.

The left rotates through these causes like a playlist on repeat, igniting outrage for political points. Youth get hit hardest, pulled in by raw emotions and peer pressure. Young people crave a purpose, and Democrats exploit that vulnerability.

As a student, I jumped at any chance to skip class for a protest. Most kids lack deep info; flashy headlines and social media clips do the work. In places like LA, it escalates to violent riots, as we saw tonight with crowds clashing at federal buildings. Elsewhere, students stage walkouts, egged on by progressive activists who fan the flames of rebellion.

I am now a populist activist, squeezing in actions after my day job. Progressives have turned it into careers. They live off taxpayers with grants, donations, and NGO salaries, protesting full-time.

Locally, the same faces pop up at every hot-button event, from climate marches to anti-police rallies. Somehow, every path circles back to anarchy, bashing law enforcement, and pushing communist ideals under the guise of justice.

Take January 6. The left clings to those images as the ultimate sin of the right, yet they overlook or excuse mountains of destruction under their own banners.

Murders, arsons, and chaos get a pass if it aligns with their narrative. Today, elected officials like Maxine Waters joined the fray in LA, standing with anti-ICE crowds trespassing on federal land. Other Democrats, from AOC to Ilhan Omar, have been quoted urging people to “put their bodies on the line”, “fight back” and “resist” ICE’s efforts. Compare that to Trump’s call for peaceful voices on J6.

Many businesses closed today in “solidarity.” Are they truly supportive, or just scared of what activists might do if they stay open? Fear of boycotts, vandalism, or worse likely plays a bigger role than any love for law enforcement.

I put together a timeline of left-wing causes and the destruction they sparked over the last 20 years since I was in college. I pulled this from direct reports, avoiding mainstream media spins that downplay the damage.

•  2008-2012: Occupy Wall Street and Economic Inequality. Starting in 2011, protests against corporate greed led to encampments in cities like New York and Oakland. In Oakland, clashes with police resulted in port shutdowns, vandalized banks, and over 400 arrests in one night. Federal buildings got tagged, and small businesses suffered looting.

•  2014: Ferguson Riots over Police Brutality. After Michael Brown’s death, protests turned violent in Missouri. Rioters burned businesses, looted stores, and attacked police with bottles and rocks. Over 300 arrests, with damages exceeding $5 million.

•  2015: Baltimore Riots following Freddie Gray’s Death. Crowds set fires to vehicles and buildings, looted pharmacies and shops. National Guard deployment followed, with 235 arrests and millions in property damage.

•  2016: Post-Election Anti-Trump Protests. Nationwide marches against Trump’s win included violence in Portland, where rioters smashed windows and set fires. In Oakland, cars burned and highways blocked.

•  2017: Inauguration Day Riots in DC. On Trump’s swearing-in, black bloc groups smashed storefronts, torched a limo, and hurled projectiles at police. Over 200 arrests, with charges for rioting and property destruction.

•  2017-2018: Campus Protests against Conservative Speakers. At Berkeley, antifa-led crowds rioted to shut down events, breaking windows, starting fires, and assaulting attendees.

•  2020: George Floyd Protests and BLM Riots. Nationwide upheaval after Floyd’s death saw peaceful marches devolve into arson and looting in cities like Minneapolis, where a police precinct burned. In Kenosha, Wisconsin, riots destroyed businesses after Jacob Blake’s shooting, with two deaths during clashes. Millions of dollars in damage and a reported 25 deaths including a beloved black police captain, David Dorn.

•  2020: Portland Federal Building Attacks. Over 100 nights of unrest targeted the federal courthouse. Rioters used lasers, fireworks, and Molotov cocktails against agents. Declared riots nightly, with attempts to burn the building and breach fences.

•  2020: Attacks on Federal Sites in Other Cities. In Seattle, a CHAZ zone led to murders and extortion. In Los Angeles, federal buildings vandalized during broader riots, with officers injured by thrown objects.

•  2020-2021: COVID Policy Enforcement and Related Unrest. Strict lockdowns in blue states sparked backlash, but left-wing enforcers clashed with dissenters. In Portland, antifa targeted lockdown critics, blending with ongoing anti-police actions.

•  2026: Anti-ICE Protests and Walkouts. Following fatal shootings in Minneapolis during raids, nationwide student walkouts and strikes. In LA, crowds block federal buildings, with Democrat politicians on site. Protests in over 40 states include business shutdowns and confrontations with agents.

This cycle that mostly occurs around election years and when Republicans hold government power, shows how Democrats’ policies sow division, then harvest the outrage. Open borders invite crises, lax policing breeds crime, and green mandates hike costs, all while they point fingers elsewhere. Youth get roped in, businesses cower, and the same activists profit. In the end, it erodes order, demonizes cops, and edges toward a system where government controls everything.

For visuals from today’s chaos, check these posts:

•  Maxine Waters amid the LA crowd: https://x.com/anthonycabassa/status/2017390146124239173

•  Activists targeting federal buildings: https://x.com/amuse/status/2017412317558800445

•  Democrat quotes inciting resistance: https://x.com/politicalstacy/status/2015817773545296135

Don’t let the progressives violent activism and leftist media erase the memories of their destruction and distract from reality.

The 2026 California Governor election is shaping up to be a pivotal battle, with Republicans courting an opportunity to end over a decade of Democrat dominance.

This week, Steve Hilton delivered a series of wins that may have given him the edge over Sheriff Bianco, the only other serious Republican candidate at this point. From assembling a strong slate of running mates to a surge in fundraising, Hilton is positioning himself as a frontrunner capable of challenging the entrenched Democratic machine.

Hilton kicked off the week by unveiling what he calls his “Golden Ticket,” a slate of candidates designed to present a unified, credible alternative to the status quo. Joining him are Gloria Romero for lieutenant governor, Michael Gates for attorney general, and Herb Morgan for controller. He is crafting a team that can address California’s super majority created crises.

At first, I was skeptical about Romero’s inclusion. As a former Democrat state Senate majority leader, her party switch doesn’t sit well with many. Will she lose the low information Republican voter? However, after digging deeper, I think this is a masterful political stroke. Romero has long been a champion of education reform, clashing with powerful teachers’ unions over charter schools and parental choice. Her Latino roots and history of appealing to moderate Democrats could peel away voters disillusioned with the party’s progressive excesses. Latinos do make up nearly 40 percent of the population in California, her presence on the ticket broadens appeal without compromising core conservative principles on school choice and accountability.

Michael Gates is the Huntington Beach city attorney and is known for his tough stance on local control and resistance to state overreach. Herb Morgan has a proven track record in auditing and transparency. This slate signals Hilton’s intent to run a coordinated campaign focused on forging a new path in “Califraudia”.

Hilton also announced fundraising numbers that outpaced every Democratic candidate except self-funded billionaire Tom Steyer. According to his campaign filings, Hilton raised $5.7 million overall, including over $4 million in the last six months from more than 30,000 individual donors. This shoots past the fundraising figures from high-profile Democrats like Swalwell and Katie Porter and the other Republican in the race, Bianco.

What stands out is the grassroots nature of Hilton’s support. His average donation is in the low hundreds showing support from actual voters, not political king makers. Hilton stated in a recent post, “We are leading this race and building a grassroots political revolution.” His financial edge could force the California Republican Party (CAGOP) to rally behind him, especially as polls show him close to Sheriff Chad Bianco among independents.

Rick Caruso’s decision not to run for office, announced this week, removes a major variable from the equation. The billionaire developer had frozen the field for viable challengers to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass for a year, propping her up while rumored to run for Governor of California or Mayor of Los Angeles.

With Caruso out the attention shifts. This benefits all other contenders, who can concentrate resources without the distraction of a self-funded wildcard. I had speculated Caruso might even run as a Republican, despite his leftward drift.

The Democrat side currently includes some of the most unlikable candidates in history; Swalwell, Porter, Steyer, Antonio Villaraigosa, and Xavier Becerra. The real momentum appears to be with San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan. He has proven himself in California politics by tackling homelessness and public safety with pragmatic reforms and has been a vocal critic of Newsom. Traders in political betting markets now see him as the second-most likely to become governor, behind Hilton.

I expect Mahan will announce his run in the coming weeks. It would be a huge upgrade over the current Democrat contenders and outgoing Newsom. If Mahan jumps in, he has potential to unify the center, making the general election very interesting. Will the establishment Democrats accept him, or will they stick with the unlikable but controllable Swalwell and Porter, who will do anything for power?

The CAGOP also has a history of gate-keeping, often backing candidates who can raise big money regardless of electability. I worried they might “fan girl” for Caruso, ignoring those building support. With Caruso gone and Hilton’s fundraising explosion, the party may finally support a grassroots candidate. His media savvy and policy depth make him a formidable general election contender.

The primary looms as a potential slugfest between Hilton and Bianco. Both are similar on policy, but their surrogates have ramped up attacks on each other this week, more than ever before. Unity is crucial; a prolonged primary will drain resources and momentum needed for November. One funny but unlikely outcome come is if they are the top two vote earners in the primary giving us two republicans in the general election.

I saw Bianco in action last week at the Ventura County Young Republicans Golf Tournament, which he sponsored. It was refreshing to see him prioritize the 20 to 40-year-old conservatives, emphasizing their role in rebuilding the party. He spoke well and Ventura County Sheriff Jim Fryhoff nearly stole the show with his enthusiastic support. Bianco understands the importance of engaging and supporting young voters, a demographic Republicans must win back.

California deserves better than the failed, corrupt Democratic machine. Whoever inherits Newsom’s dirty diaper of a budget and mountains of corruption will have a lot to overcome.

Hilton’s week will probably be the deciding factor for him to move forward: a strong team, millions in grassroots funding, and a clear vision to “save California.” With Caruso out and Mahan lurking, the GOP should unite soon. Hopefully, the party endorses one candidate to focus resources, November is coming fast.

We live in an age of political chameleons, where politicians shift positions to match the evolving demands of their base. AI has made it even easier to script messaging that appeals to any audience. Low information voters are easily manipulated by sound bites and emotional appeals.

Scott Weiner is one of the few who is atypical. For years he has avoided major adaptations on hot-button issues like Israel because he faced little real competition in his safe San Francisco state senate seat. I knew this would eventually become a challenge for him when running for higher office.

Wiener has stood out as one of the only prominent progressives in California who isn’t rabidly anti-Israel and pro-Palestine. With his Jewish heritage and history of supporting Israel’s right to exist, including visits to the country and bills like AB 715 addressing antisemitism in schools, he resisted the most extreme rhetoric that has become standard on the left.

That changed with his run for Nancy Pelosi’s open CA-11 congressional seat. The Democratic Party has moved sharply left on Israel in recent years, with growing anti-Israel sentiment among progressives and younger voters driving demands for stronger criticism of the government’s actions in Gaza. Wiener did condemn Netanyahu’s government early, called the devastation indefensible and a moral stain, and pushed for ceasefires and no U.S. funding for destruction, but he stopped short of calling it genocide.

At the first candidate forum on January 7, 2026, at UC Law San Francisco, the lightning round question arrived: “Is Israel committing genocide in Gaza?” Saikat Chakrabarti and Connie Chan immediately held up “YES” signs. Wiener stayed stone-faced, twirling his sign between yes and no without committing. The crowd erupted in boos, loud and sustained, reflecting the intense pressure from San Francisco’s progressive base. Social media erupted.

Then, on January 11, 2026 (today), Wiener posted a video on X stating: “For years, I’ve condemned Netanyahu and his extremist government and the devastation they’ve inflicted on Gaza. It’s why I’ve been clear I won’t support U.S. funding for the destruction of Palestinian communities. I’ve stopped short of calling it genocide, but I can’t anymore.” He added that the Israeli government’s actions to destroy Gaza and push Palestinians out qualify as genocide.

This full pivot on the genocide label arrives only after the forum backlash and with far-left challengers like Chakrabarti (AOC’s former chief of staff, pushing anti-corporate bold ideas) and Chan (labor-backed progressive supervisor) gaining ground by taking a firm stance. Wiener has never had to adapt this way before. No serious primary threat forced his hand. Now, facing real competition in the June 2026 primary from a party increasingly hostile to Israel, he finally adjusts.

His Sacramento record remains consistent: he authors bills to address “disparities affecting LGBTQ and trans communities”, but they reduce penalties and safeguards for traditional communities.

He is the author of many laws that have contributed to the mass exodus of voters with family values in California. A “purge by legislature” that has worked wonders for a party that has its lowest approval in history and preys off the apathy of the average Californian.

•  SB 145 gives judges discretion on sex offender registration for certain close-in-age sodomy cases.

•  SB 239 downgrades knowingly transmitting HIV to a misdemeanor.

•  SB 132 requires biological males identifying as women to be housed in female prisons.

•  SB 357 decriminalizes loitering for prostitution.

•  SB 107 makes California a trans sanctuary state, allowing out-of-state minors access to hormones, surgeries, and protections from parental custody challenges.

•  SB 866 allows minors to consent to medical procedures without parental knowledge.

•  SB 930 extends alcohol service hours to 4 a.m. in major cities.

These changes soften rules on crime, health risks, prison safety, exploitation, youth medical decisions, and public intoxication. Wiener’s deep SF ties, strong fundraising, and reputation as an effective legislator who builds coalitions give him an advantage, but his socialist housing efforts and LGBTQ record may not fully shield him against challengers who out-flank him further left.

For comparison, New York City’s new mayor Zohran Mamdani, a true chameleon, showed a different style of flexibility. Mamdani won by running a campaign that appealed to the many different factions on the left and even courted the center. His smooth scripting had the correct message curated for every crowd he spoke to.

Wiener’s Gaza change finally arrives under direct pressure from a tougher primary field. He had to finally adapt when the political heat rose and his voting base demanded it. What ever happens in this race we will be stuck with radical progressive, taking the party even further left.

I spent all day digging into the stunning news and watching the heartwarming videos of how most Venezuelans are reacting: U.S. forces captured Nicolás Maduro and his wife in an hours long military operation and they’ve already arrived in New York to face those long-standing drug charges.

At first, I was wary as I’m not a fan of “regime changes” or getting bogged down in foreign conflicts that cost us trillions and kill thousands to millions of people. After hours of research, this one feels different, so I’m cautiously optimistic.

The DOJ unsealed a Grand Jury indictment today from the Southern District of New York charging Maduro, his wife Cilia Flores, and others with narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation, possession of machine guns, and related counts. These build on the 2020 charges, and the details are incredibly specific, suggesting someone close to him provided key intel.

Then there’s the strategic side, which CynicalPublius laid out perfectly in his thread. Legally, it’s tied to those valid drug indictments, but the real driver was national security.

Venezuela under Maduro became a hub for U.S. adversaries: Russia, Iran, Hezbollah, and China via Belt and Road. It sheltered cartels like FARC, Sinaloa, and Tren de Aragua, facilitated migrant flows as a destabilization tool, and routed oil to our enemies on the black market.

Removing Maduro invokes the Monroe Doctrine, keeps hostile powers out of our hemisphere, and could flood the market with Venezuelan crude, dropping prices and costs of living for everyone while enriching the Venezuelan economy again.

As someone running a business in a state that’s killed off refineries and pipelines through bad policy, cheaper fuel is important to me. Energy is a critical building block for society. EVERYTHING costs more when fuel is expensive and being dependent on volatile global sources has never been good. Costs of goods and many services are directly affected by energy costs. My friend has a party supply company and fuel is his biggest overhead. It determines how much he charges and how much he can pay his staff.

Venezuela’s heavy crude matches what our infrastructure was designed for, back when we had good relations. This could bring stability, lower energy costs for Americans and other countries, and benefit Venezuelans who overwhelmingly rejected Maduro in their 2024 election before he clung to power with foreign backing and a military coup.

Legally, it seems to holds up. Precedents like Noriega and others show international arrests for U.S. charges are prosecutable. The operation was precise, no endless occupation (yet), and aligned with what Venezuelans want. Secretary Rubio dismissed UN complaints back in September calling Maduro an indicted fugitive.

This isn’t the endless wars Trump promised to avoid. It looks surgical, justified, and in our interests. Things could change, but based on today’s facts, I’m glad we acted. Cheaper fuel, stronger security, and justice for a narco-regime? Sounds good to me.

Remember when we watched Joe Biden and Border Czar Kamala Harris turn our southern border into a free-for-all during their four years in office? From 2021 to early 2025, Customs and Border Protection recorded over 10 million encounters with illegal migrants nationwide, most at the southwest border. That number alone is huge, but it does not even include the gotaways, those who slipped through undetected. Estimates put gotaways at around 2 million or more during those years. Low estimates are that 12 million or more unvetted people flood in, many from countries with weak health systems and low vaccination rates.

Why invite this chaos during a global health crisis? It makes no sense to throw open the doors to untested and likely unvaccinated masses while forcing strict rules on American citizens.

In 2025, we face the worst measles outbreak in decades. The CDC reports 2,012 confirmed cases by late December, with 50 outbreaks across 44 states. Ninety-three percent of those sick were unvaccinated or status unknown. Many cases tie to imported strains and other diseases like tuberculosis and whooping cough have risen too. 

Most migrants came from places where these illnesses run rampant, and they faced no upfront vaccine mandates like legal immigrants do. Illegal crossers get basic checks later, if ever. How can anyone deny the link when the timing lines up perfectly with the massive inflows under Biden?

Democrats are pointing fingers at Robert F. Kennedy Jr., our new Health and Human Services secretary under President Trump, and are blaming  him for the surges. They ignore that he just started the job in 2025 and major changes to vaccine policy have not even been implemented yet. Outbreaks were already happening before Trump took office. Why ignore the real cause, the open-border mess Biden/Harris created, and try to blame someone who has barely had time to act? They are deflecting from the failures of their own policies as always. 

American children must follow the CDC schedule, getting over 70 doses by age 18 to attend school or play sports. Shots for measles, polio, whooping cough, and more are mandatory in most states. Parents lose choices if they want their kids in normal activities. But millions crossing illegally? No such requirements. Legal immigrants prove vaccinations eventually, but asylum seekers and border jumpers often skip them altogether.

Why force this on our own families while waving through illegal immigrants? Most illegals I’ve met steal social security numbers and identification, how will we ever know what their medical history is? 

Big Pharma loves this setup. The 1986 law shields them from lawsuits over vaccine injuries, letting them rake in billions from mandates. VAERS reports thousands of adverse events yearly, including serious ones. Officials brush them off as rare, but real families suffer myocarditis, Guillain-Barre, and worse. I personally became a vaccine skeptic when my own healthy children had severe reactions to vaccines. 

Why push injections on healthy kids without full accountability? Alternatives exist too. Vitamin A cuts measles complications in deficient children. Better nutrition, hygiene, and natural approaches build real immunity without risks.

Forced shots ignore these options to keep profits flowing. If you are running a for-profit pharmaceutical company you have to think up new ways to make profit, finding ways to mandate or convince healthy people to take drugs is one way they have had success. Vaccine mandates and sex hormones for confused children are big money for them. 

Biden/Harris policies endangered us all by letting in unvetted, unchecked masses. Now diseases return, and the left deflects blame. Under Trump/Vance, the border is secure again, encounters near zero.

We must demand fairness: same rules for everyone, transparency on harms, and freedom from pharma-driven mandates. American Populism means protecting our health and sovereignty, not bowing to globalist open borders or corporate greed.

After I watched the full 42-minute bombshell video from Nick Shirley and Dave, one moment stands out as the perfect example of the left’s twisted priorities.

At the “Quality Learing Center” (yes, “learning” is misspelled on the sign, a facility licensed for nearly 100 kids and raking in millions of our federal tax dollars), an older white woman spots Nick and Dave calmly asking basic questions about the empty building. Her immediate freakout? She starts screaming, “Don’t open up! It’s ICE! Don’t open up! He’s ICE!”

These guys are average Americans holding public payment records, knocking politely to ask where the supposed 102 children are. No badges, no warrants, no immigration enforcement. Yet her brain short-circuits and defaults to accusing them of being federal immigration agents. Why? Because years of nonstop demonization of law enforcement, especially ICE and border security, has programmed her to view anyone questioning potential fraud in immigrant communities as the enemy.

This is cognitive dissonance at its most deranged. Here we have a ghost daycare pulling in about $4 million in government funds with zero signs of children, part of the broader $110 million Nick and Dave documented in one day alone. Blatant low-hanging fraud that hurts real families struggling with childcare costs. Instead of outrage at the thieves stealing from taxpayers, this woman panics and protects the scam by demonizing “ICE.” She’s more terrified of imaginary deportation agents than actual crooks draining billions from programs meant for the needy.

This is the power of propaganda in action. The left has spent years painting ICE and Trump as monsters, while turning a blind eye to industrial-scale abuse in Democrat strongholds. Nick and Dave are exposing thieves, yet they’re the villains in her eyes. How deep does the brainwashing go when a simple question triggers “ICE alert” mode?

American parents pay outrageous childcare and healthcare bills out of pocket, while these fraudulent centers get fully subsidized, no kids required, because of political loyalties. Even if they were legitimate, favoring one group is unfair, but they’re not. Empty buildings, hostile cover-ups, misspelled signs, multiple fake businesses at the same locations, and liberal enablers like this woman rush to defend it by attacking law enforcement and citizens who are brave enough to expose it.

California’s recent state auditor reports paint an even bigger picture of systemic fraud and waste under long-term Democratic control, dwarfing Minnesota’s scandals in scale. The nonpartisan auditor’s December 2025 high-risk assessment flagged multiple agencies for vulnerabilities leading to tens of billions in losses: estimates of up to $32 billion in COVID-era unemployment fraud, over $500 million in fraudulent payments in 2024 alone from ongoing improper benefits, $24 billion spent on homelessness programs with poor tracking and rising unsheltered rates, and persistent high error rates in food assistance that could cost the state billions more annually. This massive corruption is enabled by lax oversight in a one-party state, where accountability seems nonexistent.

Republicans in power seem slow to act with the big arrests we need, and liberal judges keep protecting criminals with technicalities. If no major prosecutions hit soon, we’re in serious trouble. Hats off again to Nick and Dave for their bravery. Watch the full video if you haven’t. It’s must-see.

Why is exposing tax theft treated as worse than the theft itself? How has demonizing law enforcement become the go-to deflection for fraud enablers? When will accountability finally override political protection?

They told us the Milpas parade had to die so that Latino families could live.

That was the official line from Santa Barbara’s Eastside Society this week: after 71 consecutive Decembers of marching bands, bikes wrapped in Christmas lights, and half the town crammed onto one street, the whole tradition is suddenly too dangerous. The stated culprit? ICE. The real one? The same human-shield playbook I wrote about last month is used yet again.

Fifty miles north, Santa Maria (a city that is 60-plus percent Latino) just ran its Parade of Lights like the calendar still read 2019. A hundred entries, thousands of spectators, zero cancellations, zero tears. Same federal agency, same rumored raids, same breathless activist bulletins. Completely different result.

Here’s the part the professional compassion industry still refuses to say out loud: when they cancel these events “to protect immigrant families,” they aren’t protecting one demographic. They’re punishing every single person in the zip code.

The high-school trumpet player who practiced in the cold for three months. Gone.

The elderly couple who have staked out the same corner since the Nixon administration. Gone.

The dad hoisting his toddler up so she can see the lights. Gone.

The teacher who finally gets to watch her own students instead of grading papers. Gone.

This wasn’t a “Latino parade” that kindly let the rest of us watch. It was a community parade that happened to run through a Latino neighborhood. When the activist class kills it “out of caution,” they don’t shield one group; they rob the entire town and they do it on purpose.

A parade that only undocumented families quietly skip doesn’t trend on Blue-sky Twitter or make national headlines. A parade that an entire city loses because of a phantom raid? That’s pure, high-octane resistance gold. That’s the photo of empty sidewalks and sad children you slap under the caption “Trump Even Stole Christmas from Santa Barbara.” That’s the outrage that keeps the donor texts flowing and the base foaming for another four years.

This entire mess is a Democrat creation, a slow-motion train wreck they engineered by treating borders like optional extras during the Biden years, waving in millions without a plan or a prayer for the fallout on schools, hospitals, and working folks’ wallets.

For decades, they shrugged off enforcement under Clinton, Bush, and Obama. Obama deported more people than any president in history, earning his “Deporter in Chief” stripes while blue-state activists barely batted an eye. But now, with Trump turning the screws back to normal, Democrats are the ones leading the charge against law enforcement, demonizing ICE agents as stormtroopers and literally throwing themselves in front of Border Patrol vehicles in staged protests that make headlines but solve nothing. It’s not about safety; it’s about sabotage, ensuring no one forgets who’s the villain in their endless resistance saga.

Santa Maria just exposed the con. A heavily Latino city looked at the same rumors, the same ICE stats, the same breathless activist bulletins, and decided the entire community, Latino, White, Asian, Black, and everyone else deserved one night of normalcy more than the Democratic Party deserved another week of viral hate clicks.

Santa Barbara’s blue elite looked at the same data and decided the whole community could shiver in the dark if it kept the Trump-derangement bonfire roaring. That’s human sacrifice in the name of compassion.

The victims aren’t just the undocumented. They’re every kid who won’t wave at Santa this year, every parent who won’t get that once-a-year photo, every neighbor who won’t bump into old friends under strings of holiday lights.

The Grinch doesn’t wear green this year. He wears a pussy hat and a “No Human Is Illegal” shirt while he cancels Christmas for the whole town just to keep you hating the wrong people.

Merry Christmas, California. In Santa Maria the lights are still blazing. In Santa Barbara they turned them off on purpose, and made sure every single one of us felt the cold.

California’s elite have faced a cascade of legal scandals over the last year and our major hubs each have their own scandals. The political fissures stretch from Sacramento to the southern border, creating aftershocks that could reshape the state for years. How long can voters ignore the rot before demanding real change?

Sacramento, California

Governor Gavin Newsom continues his national push into red states with his presidential ambitions, urging millions of former residents to return while glossing over his administration’s deepening troubles.

The latest blow landed in November 2025, when federal prosecutors indicted his former chief of staff, Dana Williamson, with proof of bank and wire fraud tied to a sprawling corruption scheme. 

Williamson, a longtime Democratic operative, allegedly conspired with four others, including Sean McCluskie, former chief of staff to Xavier Becerra, to siphon over $1 million from dormant campaign accounts, including Becerra’s.  McCluskie pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges just days later, admitting his role in the theft that prosecutors say exploited political loopholes for personal gain. 

Becerra, now running to succeed Newsom as governor, finds his campaign tainted by association, with many of us questioning if this is just the tip of a broader web of influence peddling. 

Meanwhile, California Attorney General and potential Governor Candidate Rob Bonta’s inner circle also draws scrutiny: His chief of staff, Viviana Becerra, pocketed a $50,000 check from his campaign committee while overseeing CA DOJ operations. Sacramento insiders dismiss this as “business as usual.” 

If top aides to the governor, a gubernatorial hopeful, and the state’s top prosecutor are entangled in fraud, who is left to hold the line on integrity?

San Francisco, California

The Bay Area’s progressive experiment shows fresh cracks amid a surge of ethics and legal probes. The San Francisco Department of Public Works corruption scandal drags on, with federal investigators uncovering bribery and fraud schemes that have already toppled officials and eroded public trust. 

In a related blow, former Human Rights Commission executive director Sheryl Davis faces 31 ethics violations for accepting gifts in exchange for contracts and misusing over $4 million in public funds, prompting an audit that exposed a culture of unchecked favoritism.  

Mayor London Breed’s administration responded by appointing Alexandra Shepard, a former federal prosecutor who won a landmark corruption case, as the city’s first inspector general to hunt down graft.  Yet a nonprofit linked to the scandals, Collective Impact, dodged a full city probe in a controversial late-night ruling showing the backroom protections for the connected. 

Since 2020, eight department heads have been ousted over corruption allegations. Is San Francisco’s allure a facade for the Democrats systemic sleaze? When even human rights watchdogs prey on the vulnerable, what hope remains for everyday residents drowning in crime and decay?

San Jose, California

Silicon Valley hides an underbelly of influence trading and racial tensions. The “Godfather of Little Saigon” bribery cases continue to ripple, ensnaring Councilmember Bien Doan and associates in a web of illegal contributions and favors from waste management executives.  Adding fuel, leaked text messages revealed councilmembers exchanging racial slurs, prompting Mayor Matt Mahan, seemingly one of the few principled Democrats, to demand transparency from a stonewalling city hall. 

Investigative outlet San Jose Spotlight escalated the fight by suing the city and police over withheld inflammatory messages dubbed a “Tammany Hall”-style cover-up. 

Former Assemblymember Evan Low drew a $106,000 fine for concealing payments from actor Alec Baldwin, underscoring a pattern of pay-to-play politics. 

These scandals compound Santa Clara County’s core crises of homelessness and housing. In a tech hub that preaches diversity, why do elected leaders traffic in bigotry and bribes? Can San Jose’s voters break the cycle, or will the next election just recycle the same tainted players?

Los Angeles, California

The nation’s second-largest city grapples with a legacy of graft that refuses to fade. Councilmember Curren Price faces escalated public corruption charges from the DA’s office, accused of steering contracts to allies in exchange for bribes and benefits. 

LA County CEO Fesia Davenport’s $2 million taxpayer-funded exit payout exemplifies a board of supervisors steeped in cronyism, with payouts to insiders during probes into misuse of funds. 

Mayor Karen Bass’s office stands accused of “legalized corruption” in doling out no-bid contracts and hush money deals, while charter reforms aimed at curbing City Hall scandals have quietly fizzled.   Federal agents’ Capitol visits hint at broader legislative probes, but details remain sealed.  From wildfires exacerbated by neglected infrastructure to tent cities sprawling unchecked, their corruption siphons resources from those who need them most. If LA’s leaders treat public dollars like personal piggy banks, how can the city ever rebuild trust, let alone its streets?

San Diego, California

Once seen as a political protege to Newsom, former Supervisor Nathan Fletcher’s fall deepens with fresh allegations of misusing $1.1 million in campaign funds for personal luxuries, on top of prior sexual assault claims that forced his rehab stint and resignation.  In September 2025, Fletcher vowed no political comeback but pay attention to the enablers in his orbit, including his wife Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher’s political and union ties.

Down south, Chula Vista’s school district reels from corruption claims against its former COO for cozying up to vendors in bid-rigging schemes.  A defense contractor’s president pleaded guilty to a $16 million bribery plot involving military contracts, highlighting how federal dollars fuel local excess.  District supervisor races devolve into mudslinging over fabricated corruption smears.  San Diego prides itself on sunshine and stability. Yet when even school boards and supervisors peddle lies and graft, what does that say about the “America’s Finest City” moniker? Will these exposures finally purge the bad actors, or just pave the way for slicker successors?

Many Democratic strongholds, once untouchable, now teeter amid this torrent of indictments and exposures. The 2025 indictments of Newsom and Becerra aides alone have injected chaos into the gubernatorial race, while city-level scandals erode the party’s monopoly on power. Will independent or Republican challengers be able to capitalize on the outrage? Or does California’s one-party dominance breed a complacency that dooms reform every time?

One truth stands clear: Ignoring these scandals doesn’t make them vanish. It just lets the next one fester. U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli shared a link to report corrupt officials. We must keep chipping away.