POLITICS

Reporting from Washington — With the campaign in its final week, well-funded conservative groups have shifted their focus from the airwaves to voters’ phone lines, front doors and mailboxes — part of a get-out-the-vote effort that could tip the scales in tight races across the country.

But the push to get the nation’s conservative voters to the polls is fractured and untested, with some “tea party” activists refusing to cooperate with more mainstream Republicans, in contrast to the unified and well-organized parallel effort by unions and Democrats, according to key players on both sides.

Up to now, the emphasis on the right has been on television ads, and conservative groups — including American Crossroads, founded in part by GOP strategist Karl Rove — have dominated with the help of undisclosed donors willing to pour millions of dollars into key races.

For the final stretch, Crossroads is dedicating $10 million to the “ground game.” The conservative Americans for Prosperity expects to spend $17 million, opening field offices in 12 states. Tea party organizers, state parties, antiabortion groups and business associations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have also begun their own get-out-the-vote efforts.

The state parties in Illinois and California, in particular, are well funded and sophisticated, and may surpass voter outreach those states have seen in the past.

With money and momentum on their side, Republicans are considered competitive in dozens of districts once thought to be out of reach. But races are tightening, and the voter mobilization program could determine whether the election provides better than average midterm gains for the GOP.

“There is a sense now that Republicans may not be able to capitalize on the backlash against [President] Obama and the Democrats because they lack the well-organized voter ID and get-out-the-vote effort that they have had in the past,” said Lawrence Jacobs, a University of Minnesota political scientist who has been comparing the ground game of both parties. There is enormous variation now state to state, he said.

Democrats and allied groups are spending most of their $200-million political budgets in the largely invisible effort to turn out sympathetic voters.

The party was shocked to lose control of the House in 1994 in the so-called Gingrich Revolution. Since then, Democrats and labor have emphasized personal voter contact to win close races. In Pennsylvania last week, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said his organization planned to “touch” every union member in the state 25 times with mail, phone calls and personal visits in the campaign’s final weeks.

For the GOP, this year’s patchwork approach is a dramatic departure from the last decade, when a single well-organized entity — the Republican National Committee — ran sophisticated voter mobilization programs that were years in the making. But the RNC has faltered in funding and organization recently, and outside groups have stepped up efforts, many of them starting only recently.

“I think the biggest difference in this year is generally this is not a party-driven year, this is not a personality-driven year,” said Americans for Prosperity President Tim Phillips, whose group has launched its first voter mobilization effort. Phillips said the effort reflected a shift to movement politics organized around issues, not politicians.

American Crossroads, a tax-exempt group receiving contributions from corporations and wealthy individuals, is putting its ground-game resources to use in nine battleground states. It plans to send more than 100 volunteers to Colorado and Nevada, said Steven Law, the organization’s president.

Crossroads will generate 9 million phone calls and 5 million pieces of mail before election day, Law said.

More important, Crossroads has encouraged other conservative groups to share voter contact lists, polling information and geographic priorities, as Democrats have in recent years.

“We wanted to be a resource for exchanging lists of names and voter targeting information,” Law said.

Although some conservative groups — such as the Republican Governors Assn. and Americans for Tax Reform — have cooperated with Crossroads, others resist being too closely associated with establishment figures.

FreedomWorks, a Washington-based group that has supported tea party activists across the country, expects to spend $500,000 on its own program that taps into the network of tea party supporters.

Brendan Steinhauser, director of state and federal campaigns at FreedomWorks, said the distance from the party was an advantage in recruiting new activists.

“A lot of people don’t want to work with the Republican Party, for the most part,” he said. “They like the candidate, but they don’t want to go to GOP headquarters. They’ll work with us.”

In addition to getting out the vote, many conservative organizations continue to buy advertising even though little air time is available. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said it would spend $1 million on Washington’s Senate race in the final week, using much of it for Web-based advertising on behalf of Dino Rossi, the Republican hoping to unseat Sen. Patty Murray.

The chamber is also sending funds to newly competitive House races in Washington, Wisconsin, Arizona, New York, Ohio, Oregon and Pennsylvania. All told, the chamber expects to be active in 50 House races and 12 Senate campaigns this cycle, said Political Director Bill Miller.

For tea party groups, the final days of the campaign represent the culmination of months of training and organizing political newcomers.

In West Virginia, where the Senate race is close, a handful of groups are coordinating efforts on weekly phone calls. As they canvass neighborhoods, FreedomWorks arms them with maps pinpointing independent, unreliable voters who are likely to lean conservative.

FreedomWorks, led by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, says it aims to reach 50,000 voters in West Virginia with both a knock on the door and a phone call.

[email protected]

[email protected]

Tension between Indiana University and its student newspaper flared last week with the elimination of the outlet’s print editions and the firing of a faculty advisor who refused an order to keep news stories out of a homecoming edition.

Administrators may have been hoping to minimize distractions during its homecoming weekend as the school prepared to celebrate a Hoosiers football team with its highest-ever national ranking. Instead, the controversy has entangled the school in questions about censorship and student journalists’ 1st Amendment rights.

Advocates for student media, Indiana Daily Student alumni and high-profile supporters including billionaire Mark Cuban have excoriated the university for stepping on the outlet’s independence.

The Daily Student is routinely honored among the best collegiate publications in the country. It receives about $250,000 annually in subsidies from the university’s Media School to help make up for dwindling ad revenue.

On Tuesday, the university fired the paper’s advisor, Jim Rodenbush, after he refused an order to force student editors to ensure that no news stories ran in the print edition tied to the homecoming celebrations.

“I had to make the decision that was going to allow me to live with myself,” Rodenbush said. “I don’t have any regrets whatsoever. In the current environment we’re in, somebody has to stand up.”

Student journalists still call the shots

A university spokesperson referred an Associated Press reporter to a statement issued Tuesday, which said the campus wants to shift resources from print media to digital platforms both for students’ educational experience and to address the paper’s financial problems.

Chancellor David Reingold issued a separate statement Wednesday saying the school is “firmly committed to the free expression and editorial independence of student media. The university has not and will not interfere with their editorial judgment.”

It was late last year when university officials announced they were scaling back the cash-strapped newspaper’s print edition from a weekly to seven special editions per semester, tied to campus events.

The paper published three print editions this fall, inserting special event sections, Rodenbush said. Last month, Media School officials started asking why the special editions still contained news, he said.

Rodenbush said IU Media School Dean David Tolchinsky told him this month that the expectation was print editions would contain no news. Tolchinsky argued that Rodenbush was essentially the paper’s publisher and could decide what to run, Rodenbush said. He told the dean that publishing decisions were the students’ alone, he said.

Tolchinsky fired him Tuesday, two days before the homecoming print edition was set to be published, and announced the end of all Indiana Daily Student print publications.

“Your lack of leadership and ability to work in alignment with the University’s direction for the Student Media Plan is unacceptable,” Tolchinsky wrote in Rodenbush’s termination letter.

The newspaper was allowed to continue publishing stories on its website.

Student journalists see a ‘scare tactic’

Andrew Miller, the Indiana Daily Student’s co-editor in chief, said in a statement that Rodenbush “did the right thing by refusing to censor our print edition” and called the termination a “deliberate scare tactic toward journalists and faculty.”

“IU has no legal right to dictate what we can and cannot print in our paper,” Miller said.

Mike Hiestand, senior legal counsel at the Student Press Law Center, said 1st Amendment case law going back 60 years shows student editors at public universities determine content. Advisors such as Rodenbush can’t interfere, Hiestand said.

“It’s open and shut, and it’s just so bizarre that this is coming out of Indiana University,” Hiestand said. “If this was coming out of a community college that doesn’t know any better, that would be one thing. But this is coming out of a place that absolutely should know better.”

Rodenbush said that he wasn’t aware of any single story the newspaper has published that may have provoked administrators. But he speculated the moves may be part of a “general progression” of administrators trying to protect the university from any negative publicity.

Blocked from publishing a print edition, the paper last week posted a number of sharp-edged stories online, including coverage of the opening of a new film critical of arrests of pro-Palestinian demonstrators last year, a tally of campus sexual assaults and an FBI raid on the home of a former professor suspected of stealing federal funds.

The paper also has covered allegations that IU President Pamela Whitten plagiarized parts of her dissertation, with the most recent story running in September.

Richmond writes for the Associated Press.

U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) visited three Black churches in Los Angeles on Sunday morning to campaign for California’s redistricting effort, which could add five or six Democratic representatives to his ranks.

Amid a congressional deadlock over healthcare subsidies that has left the government shut down for more than two weeks, the minority leader returned to the Golden State to campaign for Proposition 50. The ballot measure would give his party more power against Republicans, who Jeffries said have refused to negotiate in the shutdown and otherwise.

“This is trouble all around us,” Jeffries told the congregation at First African Methodist Episcopal Church of Los Angeles in West Adams — after poking fun at President Trump’s 2016 gaffe misspronouncing a book of the Bible. “Folks in the government who would rather shut the government down than give healthcare to everyday Americans. Wickedness in high places. And now they want to gerrymander the congressional maps all across the country to try to rig the midterm elections.”

The packed congregation — most wearing pink to support Breast Cancer Awareness Month — were receptive to his message.

“This is a way of trying to keep things equal,” said Kim Balogun, who was in Sunday’s crowd. “A level playing field.”

For many of its members, First AME is more than just a church. As the city’s oldest African American congregation, it has been at the forefront of the fight for civil rights since its founding in 1872.

“This is family,” said Toni Scott, a retired special-education teacher who has been with First AME for 52 years. “As one of the church’s previous ministers used to say, ‘This is a hospital. People are sick; we come to be healed,’” she said.

When news reached L.A. that Nelson Mandela would be released from prison, South African immigrants and anti-apartheid activists flocked to the church, anxiously awaiting the first sights of Mandela walking free. During the 1992 riots, First AME was a bastion of hope amid a sea of chaos.

“We thank you, God, for bringing us through dark times and chaotic times,” the Rev. Charolyn Jones said to the congregation on Sunday, “knowing that our church, the African Methodist Episcopal Church, was born out of protest.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, left, greets parishioners at First African Methodist Episcopal Church of Los Angeles. “It’s an honor and a privilege to spend time worshiping at Black churches here with Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove to reinforce the message of the importance of voting yes on Proposition 50,” Jeffries said.

(Ethan Swope / For The Times)

For Jeffries, the first Black person to lead a major political party in Congress, the West Coast trip amid a congressional impasse was important.

“The African American churchgoing community has always been the foundation of the Black experience in the United States of America,” Jeffries said, who also visited the congregations of Mt. Sinai Missionary Baptist Church in South L.A. and Resurrection Church of Los Angeles in Carson. “It’s an honor and a privilege to spend time worshiping at Black churches here with Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove to reinforce the message of the importance of voting yes on Proposition 50.”

The state’s redistricting effort, Proposition 50, is part of a national fight over control of the U.S. House of Representatives, instigated by President Trump. Republicans hold a slim majority in the House, but in June, Trump began pushing Texas Republicans to redraw the state’s congressional maps to yield five more likely GOP seats.

In response, Newsom proposed California temporarily depose of its independent redistricting commission, led by 14 citizens, to redraw the state’s maps and add five Democratic seats, effectively canceling out Texas’s move.

The Democratic-controlled state Legislature quickly produced redrawn maps and scheduled a Nov. 4 special election to put them up for a vote. Mail-in ballots are already in the hands of voters.

California Republicans, including former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, have slammed the initiative as a “big scam.” Schwarzenegger called Democrats hypocritical, arguing that while they call Trump a “threat to democracy,” they want to “tear up the Constitution of California” and “take the power away from the people and give it back to the politicians.”

Jeffries noted that California was letting its citizens ultimately decide — unlike some Republican-led states.

“We said from the very beginning that we want to find bipartisan common ground whenever possible, but unfortunately, Republicans, from the beginning of this presidency, have adopted a take-it-or-leave-it, go-at-it-alone strategy,” he said, which is part of why, he added, Proposition 50 is so important.

In the current shutdown, Democrats said they will not vote for a funding bill unless it extends tax credits in the Affordable Care Act that are set to expire for many Americans at the end of the year and reverses cuts to Medicaid that Republicans passed in July’s so-called Big Beautiful Bill.

If the ACA credits expire, premiums would on average more than double for Americans on the enhanced tax credit, one health policy research firm found. But Republicans point out they come with a price: The Congressional Budget Office estimates they would cost the government $350 billion over the next decade.

The bill, which is now law, will cut Medicaid spending by $793 billion, the CBO estimated, and lead to 7.8 million Americans losing their insurance.

On the government shutdown, Richard Balogun, a member of Sunday’s First AME congregation, thinks fighting for healthcare is a worthwhile cause.

“Isn’t it amazing that in England, Australia … you can have national healthcare? Maybe you don’t get treated within the first hour, but you get treated,” he said. In America, “you have to ask yourself sometimes, if I’m going to the emergency room, can I afford that thousands of dollars I’m going to have to pay? That should not be the case in this country.”

A government shutdown has consequences: 2.3 million civilian federal employees are going without pay — roughly 750,000 of whom are furloughed. When the employees are back-paid after the government reopens, that’ll correspond to roughly $400 million of taxpayer money spent every day of the shutdown to pay employees who were not working, the CBO estimates.

Beyond National Park closures and air travel delays, food programs for low-income families could run dry without a funding bill. The Women, Infants and Children Program (WIC) can see effects as soon as one week after a shutdown, the CEO of the National WIC Assn. said. Meanwhile, SNAP (formerly known as food stamps) could also run out of funding further down the line.

Republicans blame Democrats for shutting down the government over their healthcare concerns, but Jeffries pinned it on Republicans, who’ve refused to negotiate.

To Scott, the pink her congregation was wearing to support breast cancer survivors only emphasized the importance of access to healthcare. (Jeffries sported a pink tie.)

“More people need to know what’s going on, so just having him go from church to church, mostly in the Black neighborhoods — that’s where we have the most people: in our churches,” Scott said. “Some may hear the word, see something on fake news, but we know in the church you’re going to hear truth.”

Montana’s Libertarian candidate for Senate has turned blue from drinking a silver solution that he believed would protect him from disease.

Stan Jones, a 63-year-old business consultant and part-time college instructor, said he started taking colloidal silver in 1999 for fear that Y2K disruptions might lead to a shortage of antibiotics.

His skin began turning blue-gray a year ago.

He does not take the supplement any longer, but the skin condition, called argyria, is permanent. The condition is generally not serious.

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Friday that he had commuted the sentence of former U.S. Rep. George Santos, who is serving more than seven years in federal prison after pleading guilty to fraud and identity theft charges.

Joseph Murray, one of Santos’ lawyers, told the Associated Press late Friday that the former lawmaker was released from the Federal Correctional Institution in Fairton, N.J., around 11 p.m. and was greeted outside the facility by his family.

The New York Republican was sentenced in April after admitting last year to deceiving donors and stealing the identities of 11 people — including his own family members — to make donations to his campaign.

He reported to FCI Fairton on July 25 and was housed in a minimum-security prison camp with fewer than 50 other inmates.

“George Santos was somewhat of a ‘rogue,’ but there are many rogues throughout our Country that aren’t forced to serve seven years in prison,” Trump posted on his social media platform. He said he had “just signed a Commutation, releasing George Santos from prison, IMMEDIATELY.”

“Good luck George, have a great life!” Trump said.

Santos’ account on X, which has been active throughout his roughly 84 days in prison, reposted a screenshot of Trump’s Truth Social post Friday.

During his time behind bars, Santos has been writing regular dispatches in a local newspaper on Long Island, N.Y., in which he mainly complained about the prison conditions.

In his latest letter, he pleaded to Trump directly, citing his fealty to the president’s agenda and to the Republican Party.

“Sir, I appeal to your sense of justice and humanity — the same qualities that have inspired millions of Americans to believe in you,” he wrote in the South Shore Press on Monday. “I humbly ask that you consider the unusual pain and hardship of this environment and allow me the opportunity to return to my family, my friends, and my community.”

Santos’ commutation is Trump’s latest high-profile act of clemency for former Republican politicians since retaking the White House in January.

Like Santos, Trump has been convicted of fraud. He was found guilty last year on 34 felony counts in a case related to paying hush money to a porn actor. He is the only president in U.S. history convicted of a felony.

In granting clemency to Santos, Trump was rewarding a figure who has drawn scorn from within his own party.

After becoming the first openly gay Republican elected to Congress in 2022, Santos served less than a year after it was revealed that he had fabricated much of his life story.

On the campaign trail, Santos had claimed he was a successful business consultant with Wall Street cred and a sizable real estate portfolio. But when his resume came under scrutiny, Santos eventually admitted he had never graduated from Baruch College — or been a standout player on the Manhattan college’s volleyball team, as he had claimed. He had never worked at Citigroup and Goldman Sachs.

He wasn’t even Jewish. Santos insisted he meant he was “Jew-ish” because his mother’s family had a Jewish background, even though he was raised Catholic.

In truth, the then-34-year-old was struggling financially and faced eviction.

Santos was charged in 2023 with stealing from donors and his campaign, fraudulently collecting unemployment benefits and lying to Congress about his wealth.

Within months, he was expelled from the U.S. House of Representatives — with 105 Republicans joining with Democrats to make Santos just the sixth member in the chamber’s history to be ousted by colleagues.

Santos pleaded guilty as he was set to stand trial.

Still, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) urged the White House to commute Santos’ sentence, saying in a letter sent just days into his prison term that the punishment was “a grave injustice” and a product of judicial overreach.

Greene was among those who cheered the announcement Friday. But Rep. Nick LaLota, a Republican who represents part of Long Island and has been highly critical of Santos, said in a post on social media that Santos “didn’t merely lie” and his crimes “warrant more than a three-month sentence.”

“He should devote the rest of his life to demonstrating remorse and making restitution to those he wronged,” LaLota said.

Santos’ clemency appears to clear not just his prison term, but also any “further fines, restitution, probation, supervised release, or other conditions,” according to a copy of Trump’s order posted on X by Ed Martin, the Justice Department’s pardon attorney.

As part of his guilty plea, Santos had agreed to pay restitution of $373,750 and forfeiture of $205,003.

In explaining his reason for granting Santos clemency, Trump claimed the lies Santos told about himself were no worse than misleading statements U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal — a Democrat and frequent critic of the administration —had made about his military record.

Blumenthal apologized 15 years ago for implying that he served in Vietnam, when he was stateside in the Marine Reserve during the war. The senator was never accused of violating any law.

“This is far worse than what George Santos did, and at least Santos had the Courage, Conviction, and Intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN!” Trump wrote.

Marcelo writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Michael R. Sisak in New York and Susan Haigh in Connecticut contributed to this report.

LAS VEGAS — Aaron Mahan is a lifelong Republican who twice voted for Donald Trump.

He had high hopes putting a businessman in the White House and, although he found the president’s monster ego grating, Mahan voted for his reelection. Mostly, he said, out of party loyalty.

By 2024, however, he’d had enough.

“I just saw more of the bad qualities, more of the ego,” said Mahan, who’s worked for decades as a food server on and off the Las Vegas Strip. “And I felt like he was at least partially running to stay out of jail.”

Mahan couldn’t bring himself to support Kamala Harris. He’s never backed a Democrat for president. So when illness overtook him on election day, it was a good excuse to stay in bed and not vote.

He’s no Trump hater, Mahan said. “I don’t think he’s evil.” Rather, the 52-year-old calls himself “a Trump realist,” seeing the good and the bad.

Here’s Mahan’s reality: A big drop in pay. Depletion of his emergency savings. Stress every time he pulls into a gas station or visits the supermarket.

Mahan used to blithely toss things in his grocery cart. “Now,” he said, “you have to look at prices, because everything is more expensive.”

In short, he’s living through the worst combination of inflation and economic malaise he’s experienced since he began waiting tables after finishing high school.

Views of the 47th president, from the ground up

Las Vegas lives on tourism, the industry irrigated by rivers of disposable income. The decline of both has resulted in a painful downturn that hurts all the more after the pent-up demand and go-go years following the crippling COVID-19 shutdown.

Over the last 12 months, the number of visitors has dropped significantly and those who do come to Las Vegas are spending less. Passenger arrivals at Harry Reid International Airport, a short hop from the Strip, have declined and room nights, a measure of hotel occupancy, have also fallen.

Mahan, who works at the Virgin resort casino just off the Strip, blames the slowdown in large part on Trump’s failure to tame inflation, his tariffs and pugnacious immigration and foreign policies that have antagonized people — and prospective visitors — around the world.

“His general attitude is, ‘I’m going to do what I’m going to do, and you’re going to like it or leave it.’ And they’re leaving it,” Mahan said. “The Canadians aren’t coming. The Mexicans aren’t coming. The Europeans aren’t coming in the way they did. But also the people from Southern California aren’t coming the way they did either.”

Mahan has a way of describing the buckling blow to Las Vegas’ economy. He calls it “the Trump slump.”

::

Mahan was an Air Force brat who lived throughout the United States and, for a time, in England before his father retired from the military and started looking for a place to settle.

Mahan’s mother grew up in Sacramento and liked the mountains that ring Las Vegas. They reminded her of the Sierra Nevada. Mahan’s father had worked intermittently as a bartender. It was a skill of great utility in Nevada’s expansive hospitality industry.

So the desert metropolis it was.

Mahan was 15 when his family landed. After high school, he attended college for a time and started working in the coffee shop at the Barbary Coast hotel and casino. He then moved on to the upscale Gourmet Room. The money was good; Mahan had found his career.

From there he moved to Circus Circus and then, in 2005, the Hard Rock hotel and casino, where he’s been ever since. (In 2018, Virgin Hotels purchased the Hard Rock.)

Mahan, who’s single with no kids, learned to roll with the vicissitudes of the hospitality business. “As a food server, there’s always going to be slowdowns and takeoffs,” he said over lunch at a dim sum restaurant in a Las Vegas strip mall.

Mahan socked money away during the summer months and hunkered down in the slow times, before things started picking up around the New Year. He weathered the Great Recession, from 2007 to 2009, when Nevada led the nation in foreclosures, bankruptcies soared and tumbleweeds blew through Las Vegas’ many overbuilt, financially underwater subdivisions.

This economy feels worse.

Over the last 12 months, Las Vegas has drawn fewer visitors and those who have come are spending less.

(David Becker / For The Times)

With tourism off, the hotel where Mahan works changed from a full-service coffee shop to a limited-hour buffet. So he’s no longer waiting tables. Instead, he mans a to-go window, making drinks and handing food to guests, which brings him a lot less in tips. He estimates his income has fallen $2,000 a month.

But it’s not just that his paychecks have grown considerably skinnier. They don’t go nearly as far.

Gasoline. Eggs. Meat. “Everything,” Mahan said, “is costing more.”

An admitted soda addict, he used to guzzle Dr Pepper. “You’d get three bottles for four bucks,” Mahan said. “Now they’re $3 each.”

He’s cut back as a result.

Worse, his air conditioner broke last month and the $14,000 that Mahan spent replacing it — along with a costly filter he needs for allergies — pretty much wiped out his emergency fund.

It feels as though Mahan is just barely getting by and he’s not at all optimistic things will improve anytime soon.

“I’m looking forward,” he said, to the day Trump leaves office.

::

Mahan considers himself fairly apolitical. He’d rather knock a tennis ball around than debate the latest goings-on in Washington.

He likes some of the things Trump has accomplished, such as securing the border with Mexico — though Mahan is not a fan of the zealous immigration raids scooping up landscapers and tamale vendors.

He’s glad about the no-tax-on-tips provision in the massive legislative package passed last spring, though, “I’m still being taxed at the same rate and there’s no extra money coming in right now.” He’s waiting to see what happens when he files his tax return next year.

He’s not counting on much. “I’m never convinced of anything,” Mahan said. “Until I see it.”

Something else is poking around the back of his mind.

Mahan is a shop steward with the Culinary Union, the powerhouse labor organization that’s helped make Las Vegas one of the few places in the country where a waiter, such as Mahan, can earn enough to buy a home in an upscale suburb like nearby Henderson. (He points out that he made the purchase in 2012 and probably couldn’t afford it in today’s economy.)

Mahan worries that once Trump is done targeting immigrants, federal workers and Democratic-run cities, he’ll come after organized labor, undermining one of the foundational building blocks that helped him climb into the middle class.

“He is a businessman and most businesspeople don’t like dealing with unions,” Mahan said.

There are a few bright spots in Las Vegas’ economic picture. Convention bookings are up slightly for the year, and look to be strengthening. Gaming revenues have increased year-over-year. The workforce is still growing.

“This community’s streets are not littered with people that have been laid off,” said Jeremy Aguero, a principal analyst with Applied Analysis, a firm that provides economic and fiscal policy counsel in Las Vegas.

“The layoff trends, unemployment insurance, they’ve edged up,” Aguero said. “But they’re certainly not wildly elevated in comparison to other periods of instability.”

That, however, offers small solace for Mahan as he makes drinks, hands over takeout food and carefully watches his wallet.

If he knew then what he knows now, what would the Aaron of 2016 — the one so full of hope for a Trump presidency — say to the Aaron of today?

Mahan paused, his chopsticks hovering over a custard dumpling.

“Prepare,” he said, “for a bumpy ride.”

Maria worked cleaning schools in Florida for $13 an hour. Every two weeks, she’d get a $900 paycheck from her employer, a contractor. Not much — but enough to cover rent in the house that she and her 11-year-old son share with five families, plus electricity, a cellphone and groceries.

In August, it all ended.

When she showed up at the job one morning, her boss told her that she couldn’t work there anymore. The Trump administration had terminated the Biden administration’s humanitarian parole program, which provided legal work permits for Cubans, Haitians, Venezuelans and Nicaraguans like Maria.

“I feel desperate,’’ said Maria, 48, who requested anonymity to talk about her ordeal because she fears being detained and deported. “I don’t have any money to buy anything. I have $5 in my account. I’m left with nothing.’’

President Trump’s sweeping crackdown on immigration is throwing foreigners like Maria out of work and shaking the American economy and job market. And it’s happening at a time when hiring is already deteriorating amid uncertainty over Trump’s tariffs and other trade policies.

Immigrants do jobs — cleaning houses, picking tomatoes, painting fences — that most native-born Americans won’t, and for less money. But they also bring the technical skills and entrepreneurial energy that have helped make the United States the world’s economic superpower.

Trump is attacking immigration at both ends of the spectrum, deporting low-wage laborers and discouraging skilled foreigners from bringing their talents to the United States.

And he is targeting an influx of foreign workers that eased labor shortages and upward pressure on wages and prices at a time when most economists thought that taming inflation would require sky-high interest rates and a recession — a fate the United States escaped in 2023 and 2024.

“Immigrants are good for the economy,’’ said Lee Branstetter, an economist at Carnegie-Mellon University. “Because we had a lot of immigration over the past five years, an inflationary surge was not as bad as many people expected.”

More workers filling more jobs and spending more money has also helped drive economic growth and create still more job openings. Economists worry that Trump’s deportations and limits on even legal immigration will do the reverse.

In a July report, researchers Wendy Edelberg and Tara Watson of the centrist Brookings Institution and Stan Veuger of the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute calculated that the loss of foreign workers will mean that monthly U.S. job growth “could be near zero or negative in the next few years.’’

Hiring has already slowed significantly, averaging a meager 29,000 a month from June through August. (The September jobs report has been delayed by the ongoing shutdown of the federal government.) During the post-pandemic hiring boom of 2021-23, by contrast, employers added a stunning 400,000 jobs a month.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, citing fallout from Trump’s immigration and trade policies, downgraded its forecast for U.S. economic growth this year to 1.4% from the 1.9% it had previously expected and from 2.5% in 2024.

‘We need these people’

Goodwin Living, an Alexandria, Va., nonprofit that provides senior housing, healthcare and hospice services, had to lay off four employees from Haiti after the Trump administration terminated their work permits. The Haitians had been allowed to work under a humanitarian parole program and had earned promotions at Goodwin.

“That was a very, very difficult day for us,” Chief Executive Rob Liebreich said. “It was really unfortunate to have to say goodbye to them, and we’re still struggling to fill those roles.’’

Liebreich is worried that 60 additional immigrant workers could lose their temporary legal right to live and work in the United States. “We need all those hands,’’ he said. “We need all these people.”

Goodwin Living has 1,500 employees, 60% of them from foreign countries. It has struggled to find enough nurses, therapists and maintenance staff. Trump’s immigration crackdown, Liebreich said, is “making it harder.’’

The ICE crackdown

Trump’s immigration ambitions, intended to turn back what he calls an “invasion’’ at America’s southern border and secure jobs for U.S.-born workers, were once viewed with skepticism because of the money and economic disruption required to reach his goal of deporting 1 million people a year. But legislation that Trump signed into law July 4 — and which Republicans named the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — suddenly made his plans plausible.

The law pours $150 billion into immigration enforcement, setting aside $46.5 billion to hire 10,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and $45 billion to increase the capacity of immigrant detention centers.

And his empowered ICE agents have shown a willingness to move fast and break things — even when their aggression conflicts with other administration goals.

Last month, immigration authorities raided a Hyundai battery plant in Georgia, detained 300 South Korean workers and showed video of some of them shackled in chains. They’d been working to get the plant up and running, bringing expertise in battery technology and Hyundai procedures that local American workers didn’t have.

The incident enraged the South Koreans and ran counter to Trump’s push to lure foreign manufacturers to invest in America. South Korean President Lee Jae Myung warned that the country’s other companies might be reluctant about betting on America if their workers couldn’t get visas promptly and risked getting detained.

Sending Medicaid recipients to the fields

America’s farmers are among the president’s most dependable supporters.

But John Boyd Jr., who farms 1,300 acres of soybeans, wheat and corn in southern Virginia, said that the immigration raids — and the threat of them — are hurting farmers already contending with low crop prices, high costs and fallout from Trump’s trade war with China, which has stopped buying U.S. soybeans and sorghum.

“You’ve got ICE out here, herding these people up,’’ said Boyd, founder of the National Black Farmers Assn. “[Trump] says they’re murderers and thieves and drug dealers, all this stuff. But these are people who are in this country doing hard work that many Americans don’t want to do.’’

Boyd scoffed at Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ suggestion in July that U.S.-born Medicaid recipients could head to the fields to meet work requirements imposed as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. “People in the city aren’t coming back to the farm to do this kind of work,’’ he said. “It takes a certain type of person to bend over in 100-degree heat.’’

The Trump administration admits that the immigration crackdown is causing labor shortages on the farm that could translate into higher prices at the supermarket.

“The near total cessation of the inflow of illegal aliens combined with the lack of an available legal workforce results in significant disruptions to production costs and [threatens] the stability of domestic food production and prices for U.S. consumers,’’ the Labor Department said in an Oct. 2 filing to the Federal Register.

‘You’re not welcome here’

Jed Kolko of the Peterson Institute for International Economics said that job growth is slowing in businesses that rely on immigrants. Construction companies, for instance, have shed 10,000 jobs since May.

“Those are the short-term effects,’’ said Kolko, a Commerce Department official in the Biden administration. “The longer-term effects are more serious because immigrants traditionally have contributed more than their share of patents, innovation, productivity.’’

Especially worrisome to many economists was Trump’s sudden announcement last month that he was raising the fee on H-1B visas, meant to lure hard-to-find skilled foreign workers to the United States, from as little as $215 to $100,000.

“A $100,000 visa fee is not just a bureaucratic cost — it’s a signal,” said Dany Bahar, senior fellow at the Center for Global Development. “It tells global talent: You are not welcome here.”

Some are already packing up.

In Washington, D.C., one H-1B visa holder, a Harvard graduate from India who works for a nonprofit helping Africa’s poor, said Trump’s signal to employers is clear: Think twice about hiring H-1B visa holders.

The man, who requested anonymity, is already preparing paperwork to move to the United Kingdom.

“The damage is already done, unfortunately,’’ he said.

Associated Press writers Wiseman and Salomon reported from Washington and Miami, respectively. AP writers Fu Ting and Christopher Rugaber in Washington contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Thousands of rebels gathered outside the state Capitol on Saturday, mindlessly trampling the lawn in their Hokas, even as the autumnal sun in Sacramento forced them to strip off their protective puffer vests.

With chants of “No Kings,” many of these chaotic protesters spilled off sidewalks into the street, as if curbs held no power of containment, no meaning in their anarchist hearts.

Clearly, the social order has broken. Where would it end, this reporter wondered. Would they next be demanding passersby honk? Could they dare offer fiery speeches?

The answer came all too soon, when within minutes, I spotted clear evidence of the organized anti-fascist underground that U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi has been warning us about.

The “Raging Grannies of Sacramento” had set up a stage, and were testing microphones in advance of bombarding the crowd with song. These women wore coordinating aprons! They had printed signs — signs with QR codes. If grandmothers who know how to use a QR code aren’t dangerous, I don’t know who it is.

Ellen Schwartz, 82, told me this Canadian-founded group operates without recognized leaders — an “international free-form group of gaggles of grannies,” is how she put it, and I wrote it all down for Kash Patel.

Within moments, they had robbed Dick Van Dyke and Julie Andrews of their most famous duet: “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious,” mutilating it into “super callous fragile racist narcissistic POTUS.”

Ellen Schwartz, 82, is a member of the “Raging Grannies,” a group that protested at the “No Kings” rally in Sacramento on Saturday.

(Anita Chabria / Los Angeles Times)

Not to be outdone by the Silent Generation, 2-year-old Rhea also showed up, first clinging to her mom, then toddling around on her own as if she owned the place. This is a kid to keep an eye on.

Since Rhea cannot yet speak about her political beliefs, her parents gave me some insight into why she was there.

“I’m not sure if we’ll still have a civilization that allows protest very long, so I want her to at least have a memory of it,” said her dad, Neonn, who asked that their last names not be used. Like many Americans, he’s a bit hesitant to draw the eye of authority.

Kara, Rhea’s mom, had a more hopeful outlook.

“America is the people, so for me I want to keep bringing her here so that she knows she is part of something bigger: peace and justice,” she said, before walking off to see the dinosaurs.

Kara holds her 2-year-old daughter, Rhea, at the rally in Sacramento.

(Anita Chabria / Los Angeles Times)

Dinosaurs, that’s right. And tigers. And roosters. And unicorns. Even a cow hugging a chipmunk, which I believe is now illegal in most of the South.

Yes, folks, the Portland frog has started something. The place was full of un-human participants acting like animals — dancing with abandon, stomping around, saying really mean things about President Trump.

Meanwhile, the smell of roasting meat was undeniable. People, they were eating the hot dogs! They were eating the grilled onions! There were immigrants everywhere selling the stuff (and it was delicious).

I spoke to a Tyrannosaurus Rex and asked him why he went Late Cretaceous.

“If you don’t do something soon, you will have democracy be extinct,” Jim Short told me from inside the suit.

Jim Short, left, and his wife, Patty Short, donned dinosaur costumes at the “No Kings” rally in Sacramento.

(Anita Chabria / Los Angeles Times)

His wife, Patty, was ensconced in a coordinating suit, hers brown, his green. Didn’t they worry about being labeled anti-American for being here, as House Speaker Mike Johnson and others have claimed?

“I’m not afraid,” Patty said. “I’m antifa or a hardened criminal or what’s the other one?”

“Hamas?” Jim queried. “Or an illegal immigrant?”

“I think people need more history,” Patty said.

I agree.

And the day millions of very average Americans turned out to peacefully protect democracy — again — may be part of it.

President Biden, in one of his first moves in office, reversed the immigration restriction put in place by the Trump administration covering five Muslim-majority nations — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen — as well as North Korea and some government officials from Venezuela.

The Trump administration was forced to revise its original order twice to resolve legal problems over due process, implementation and exclusive targeting of Muslim nations.

Jake Sullivan, who will be Biden’s national security advisor, said the ban “was nothing less than a stain on our nation. It was rooted in xenophobia and religious animus.”

Biden also extended to June 2022 temporary legal status for Liberians who fled civil war and the Ebola outbreak.

Biden sent a broader immigration plan to Congress on Wednesday that includes a pathway to U.S. citizenship for an estimated 11 million people.

The bill also proposes an expansion of refugee admissions and increases in per-country visa caps.

SACRAMENTO — California will close part of Interstate 5 on Saturday after military officials confirmed that live-fire artillery rounds will be shot over the freeway during a Marine Corps event, prompting state officials to shut down 17 miles of the freeway in an unprecedented move expected to cause massive gridlock.

Gov. Gavin Newsom criticized the White House for failing to coordinate or share safety information ahead of the Marine Corps 250th anniversary celebration, which will feature Vice President JD Vance.

The closure will stretch from Harbor Drive in Oceanside to Basilone Road near San Onofre and will be in effect from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. Amtrak also is shutting down train service between Orange and San Diego counties midday.

“The President is putting his ego over responsibility with this disregard for public safety,” Newsom said in a statement Saturday. “Firing live rounds over a busy highway isn’t just wrong — it’s dangerous.”

The freeway closure comes despite the Marine Corps and White House saying it is unnecessary. It also underscores the deepening strain between California and the Trump administration — which has been escalating in recent months after the White House deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles to clamp down on protests, ramped up immigration raids and pressured California universities to comply with his agenda.

The Marine Corps said in a statement that Saturday’s event will be a “historic Amphibious Capabilities Demonstration, showcasing the strength and unity of the Navy-Marine Corps team and ensuring we remain ready to defend the Homeland and our Nation’s interests abroad.”

A spokesperson for the Marines said artillery was shot from Red Beach into designated ranges on Friday evening as part of a dress rehearsal.

“M777 artillery pieces have historically been fired during routine training from land-based artillery firing points west of the I-5 into impact areas east of the interstate within existing safety protocols and without the need to close the route,” the statement said. “This is an established and safe practice.”

The governor’s office said it was informed earlier in the week that the White House was considering closing the freeway and when no order materialized by Wednesday, state officials began weighing whether to do so themselves. Driving that decision, they said, were safety concerns about reports that live ordnance would be fired over the freeway and onto the base.

Newsom’s office said Thursday it was told no live fire would go over the freeway, only to be informed Friday that the military event organizers asked CalTrans for a sign along I-5 that read “Overhead fire in progress.”

Earlier Saturday morning, the state was told that live rounds are scheduled to be shot over the freeway around 1:30 p.m, prompting California Highway Patrol officials to recommend the freeway closure because of the potential safety risk and likelihood it would distract drivers.

The military show of force coincides with “No Kings” rallies and marches across the state Saturday challenging President Trump and what critics say is government overreach. Dozens of protests are scheduled Saturday across Southern California, with more than 2,700 demonstrations expected across the country.

During “No Kings” protests in June, President Trump held a military parade in Washington, D.C., which included a 21-gun salute, to celebrate the U.S. Army’s 250th anniversary.

“Using our military to intimidate people you disagree with isn’t strength — it’s reckless, it’s disrespectful, and it’s beneath the office he holds,” Newsom said in a statement. “Law and order? This is chaos and confusion.”

The Marine Corps said in a statement to The Times on Thursday that a detailed risk assessment was conducted and “no highways or transportation routes will be closed” for the event titled “Sea to Shore — A Review of Amphibious Strength.”

Capt. Gregory Dreibelbis of the I Marine Expeditionary Force said that no ordnance will be fired from a U.S. Navy ship during the event, but Marines will fire high explosive rounds from artillery known as M777 Howitzers into designated ranges “with all safety precautions in place.” Simulated explosives and visual effects will also be used, he said.

William Martin, the communications director for Vance, said the Marine Corps determined the training exercise is safe and accused Newsom of politicizing the event.

“Gavin Newsom wants people to think this exercise is dangerous,” Martin said in a statement.

Caltrans said in a press release that the closure is “due to a White House-directed military event at Camp Pendleton involving live ammunition being discharged over the freeway” and that drivers should expect delays before, during and after the event.

CalTrans advised drivers in San Diego County that the detour to head north will begin at State Route 15 in southeast San Diego. Travelers west of SR-15 along the I-5 corridor in San Diego are advised to use SR-94, SR-52, SR-56, or SR-78 to I-15 north.

Drivers heading from San Diego to Los Angeles County are advised to use I-15 north to State Route 91 west into Los Angeles. For those starting in Los Angeles and heading south to San Diego, use SR-91 east to I-15 south.

To get to Orange County from San Diego, drivers should take I-15 north to SR-91 west, then SR-55 south. If heading from Orange County south to San Diego, drivers should use SR-55 north to SR-91 east to I-15 south.

The Trump administration previously had plans for a major celebration next month for the 250th anniversary of the Navy and Marines, which would have included an air and sea show — with the Blue Angels and parading warships — to be attended by Trump, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune. Plans to host that show in San Diego have been called off, the paper reported.

Camp Pendleton is a 125,000-acre base in northwestern San Diego County that has been critical in preparing troops for amphibious missions since World War II thanks to its miles of beach and coastal hills. The U.S. Department of Defense is considering making a portion of the base available for development or lease.

WASHINGTON — Protesting the direction of the country under President Trump, people gathered Saturday in the nation’s capital and hundreds of communities across the U.S. for “ No Kings ” demonstrations.

This is the third mass mobilization since Trump’s return to the White House and comes against the backdrop of a government shutdown that not only has closed federal programs and services, but is testing the core balance of power as an aggressive executive confronts Congress and the courts in ways that organizers warn are a slide toward American authoritarianism.

Trump himself is away from Washington at his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.

“They say they’re referring to me as a king. I’m not a king,” Trump said in a Fox News interview airing early Friday, before he departed for a $1-million-per-plate MAGA Inc. super PAC fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago. Protests were expected nearby Saturday.

More than 2,600 rallies are planned Saturday in cities large and small, organized by hundreds of coalition partners.

Republicans are countering the nationwide street demonstrations by calling them “hate America” protests.

A growing opposition movement

While the earlier protests this year — against Elon Musk’s DOGE cuts in spring, then to counter Trump’s military parade in June — drew crowds, organizers say this one is building a more unified opposition movement. Top Democrats such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and progressive leader Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are joining in what organizers view as an antidote to Trump’s actions, including the administration’s clampdown on free speech and its military-style immigration raids in American cities.

“There is no greater threat to an authoritarian regime than patriotic people-power,” said Ezra Levin, a co-founder of Indivisible, among the key organizers.

As Republicans and the White House try to characterize the mass protests as a rally of radicals, Levin said the sign-up numbers are growing. Organizers said rallies are being planned within a one-hour drive for most Americans.

Rallies were also held in major European cities, where gatherings of a few hundred Americans chanted slogans and held signs and U.S. flags.

‘Crooks and con men’ and fears of police response

Retired family doctor Terence McCormally was heading to Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia to join up with others Saturday morning and walk across the Memorial Bridge that enters Washington directly in front of the Lincoln Memorial. He thought the protests would be peaceful but said the recent deployment of the National Guard makes him more leery about the police than he used to be.

“I really don’t like the crooks and con men and religious zealots who are trying to use the country” for personal gain, McCormally said, “while they are killing and hurting millions of people with bombs.”

Republicans denounce rallies

Republicans have sought to portray participants in Saturday’s rallies as far outside the mainstream of American politics, and a main reason for the prolonged government shutdown, now in its 18th day.

From the White House to Capitol Hill, GOP leaders disparaged the rallygoers as “communists” and “Marxists.”

They say Democratic leaders, including Schumer, are beholden to the far-left flank and willing to keep the government shut down to appease those liberal forces.

“I encourage you to watch — we call it the ‘Hate America’ rally — that will happen Saturday,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).

“Let’s see who shows up for that,” Johnson said, saying he expected attendees to include “antifa types,” people who “hate capitalism” and “Marxists in full display.”

In a Facebook post, Sanders said, “It’s a love America rally.”

“It’s a rally of millions of people all over this country who believe in our Constitution, who believe in American freedom and,” he said, pointing at the GOP leadership, “are not going to let you and Donald Trump turn this country into an authoritarian society.”

Democrats in Congress have refused to vote on legislation that would reopen the government as they demand funding for healthcare, which has been imperiled by the massive GOP spending bill passed this summer. Republicans say they are willing to discuss the issue only after the government reopens.

But for many Democrats, the government closure is also a way to stand up to Trump and try to push the presidency back to its place in the U.S. system as a coequal branch of government.

The situation is a potential turnaround from just six months ago, when Democrats and their allies were divided and despondent, unsure about how best to respond to Trump’s return to the White House. Schumer in particular was sharply criticized by many in his party for allowing an earlier government funding bill to sail through the Senate without using it to challenge Trump.

In April, the national march against Trump and Musk — who was then leading the White House government-slashing group known as the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE — had 1,300 registered locations. In June, for the first “No Kings” day, there were 2,100 registered locations.

“What we are seeing from the Democrats is some spine,” Levin said. “The worst thing the Democrats could do right now is surrender.”

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said he wasn’t sure if he would join the rallygoers Saturday, but he took issue with the Republicans’ characterization of the events.

“What’s hateful is what happened on Jan. 6,” he said, referring to the 2021 Capitol attack, in which a violent mob of Trump supporters stormed the building in an attempt to overturn his election loss to Joe Biden. “What you’ll see this weekend is what patriotism looks like.”

Mascaro, Riddle and Freking write for the Associated Press. Riddle reported from Montgomery, Ala. AP writer Chris Megerian in Washington contributed to this report.

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s David Zahniser, with an assist from Rebecca Ellis, Noah Goldberg and the esteemed Julia Wick, giving you the latest on city and county government.

For nearly three years, Los Angeles City Controller Kenneth Mejia has been trying to use his office to dig deep on the city’s homelessness programs — how they’re run and, more importantly, how effective they are.

The road so far has been a bit bumpy.

Early in his tenure, Mejia sent staffers to the Westside to monitor Mayor Karen Bass’ Inside Safe program, which moves unhoused people into hotels and motels. He quickly pulled back after facing resistance within City Hall.

A year later, Mejia offered to have his office conduct a court-ordered audit of the city’s homelessness programs. The work went to a private firm instead, at a cost to taxpayers of nearly $3 million.

Mejia also promised to produce a “focused audit” on Inside Safe, the mayor’s signature homelessness initiative, which has not materialized.

At one point, he even posted an Instagram video of himself and his staff doing choreographed moves to Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” to explain why he hadn’t audited the program. The video displayed the words: “We tried. We tried. We tried.”

But this week, the city’s top accountant got his big break, securing a plum role in the high-stakes legal battle over homelessness between the city and the nonprofit L.A. Alliance for Human Rights. That fight hinges on whether the city is living up to its commitment, enshrined in a legal settlement, to clear encampments and build more homeless beds.

On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter assigned attorney Daniel Garrie, an expert in cybersecurity and computer forensics, as a new third-party monitor to determine whether the city is truly on track to open 12,915 new homeless beds and remove nearly 10,000 encampments, as required by the settlement.

Carter tapped Mejia to serve as a liaison between Garrie and the city, calling him the “most knowledgeable person” on homelessness funding. In a six-page order, the judge said the city controller would support Garrie by “facilitating data access.” He also said Mejia would be less expensive than former City Controller Ron Galperin, who was also under consideration and expected to charge $800 an hour.

The judge’s order was well-timed, coming at a moment of heightened scrutiny over homelessness initiatives in L.A. and across the region.

On Thursday, federal prosecutors accused two real estate executives of misappropriating millions of dollars in state funds allocated in the region’s fight against homelessness. According to prosecutors, one of them engaged in bank fraud, identity theft and money laundering — purchasing a property on L.A.’s Westside and quickly flipping it for more than double the price to Weingart Center Assn., a nonprofit housing developer that received city funds to build interim homeless housing.

Mayoral candidate Austin Beutner, the former schools superintendent who spent some time at City Hall, also turned up the heat, calling this week for Bass to let Mejia audit the city’s homeless programs. He made that pitch after Rand researchers concluded that the region’s yearly homeless count is not accurately tracking homeless people who don’t live in tents or cars.

“The Mayor is blocking the elected Controller from auditing the City’s efforts,” Beutner said on X. “We need an immediate audit to tell us how much is being spent, on what, and whether it’s having any impact.”

Bass spokesperson Clara Karger, in an email to The Times, said the mayor and the city controller “work well together” on various issues, including a recent audit of the city’s housing department.

Asked whether Bass refused to participate in Mejia’s planned Inside Safe audit last year, Karger replied: “A city elected official should not conduct a performance audit of another elected official.”

“Inside Safe has robust oversight systems in place,” she said. “There are hundreds of pages of publicly available reports on Inside Safe and an assessment of Inside Safe was completed under the Alliance settlement.”

City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto declined to weigh in on Carter’s order. But she has previously pointed to a 16-year-old legal ruling barring the city controller from conducting performance audits of other elected officials.

“The legal advice from the City Attorney’s Office is known to our clients and has not changed over the years,” said Feldstein Soto spokesperson Karen Richardson.

The judge’s order may only be the beginning.

Mejia has been urging the city’s Charter Reform Commission to propose language that clearly gives him the power to audit programs overseen by his fellow elected officials. Such a move would erase any doubts about whether he has the legal standing to scrutinize Inside Safe.

The debate over the powers of the city controller goes back decades. In 2008, then-City Controller Laura Chick clashed with City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo over her attempt to audit his office’s workers compensation unit. The following year, right before Chick left office, a judge sided with Delgadillo and found that the controller lacked the authority for the audit.

In the short term, Carter’s order could give Mejia new leeway to identify lax oversight of L.A.’s homelessness programs, offering the public fresh insight into how closely they are tracked, and possibly identifying waste or fraud.

Mejia declined interview requests from The Times. Last month in federal court, he dazzled Carter with his office’s online dashboards, which show expenditures not just for Inside Safe but many other homelessness programs.

Carter praised the work of Mejia and his team, according to a transcript of the proceedings. Mejia, in turn, said his office enjoys the work but sometimes struggles to carry it out with its existing staff.

“Some of these contracts are 400 pages,” he said. “And so right now, we have a two-person team who is doing all of that and putting all this together.”

Attorney Elizabeth Mitchell, who represents the L.A. Alliance, welcomed the selection of Mejia, saying he’s clearly been pushing to get more involved in the case.

“My only concern is, I don’t know if he will engender a lot of cooperation from the city, because they don’t seem inclined to cooperate with him,” Mitchell said.

That wasn’t the message from Councilmember Tim McOsker, who voiced alarm in recent months over the costly bills submitted by the outside law firm handling the L.A. Alliance case for the city. McOsker, who spent several years in the city attorney’s office, expressed confidence in Mejia’s abilities and said the decision to pick him would be cost effective.

“It is imperative that we give value to the taxpayers of the city of Los Angeles,” he said.

State of play

— BEUTNERPALOOZA: After weeks of speculation, Beutner jumped into the June 2026 race for mayor. His team got off to a choppy start last weekend, uploading “Austin for LA Mayor” images to his social media accounts before he had even made a formal announcement, then abruptly taking them down. Hours later, Beutner formally went public, blasting Bass over the city’s handling of the Palisades fire, which destroyed his mother-in-law’s home and severely damaged his Pacific Palisades home.

By Monday, Beutner had released a video announcing his campaign, which assailed Trump over his immigration crackdown. Two days later, he appeared with supporters in San Pedro, repeating his warning that the city is “adrift.”

— DEFINE ADRIFT: The following morning, Bass joined former Councilmember Mike Bonin, director of the Pat Brown Institute for Public Affairs, to discuss politics, leadership and her tenure. She took issue with Beutner’s characterization of L.A. as “adrift,” saying the city has been through “multiple shocks this year,” including a catastrophic firestorm and “being invaded” by federal authorities in June.

The talk took place on the 72nd floor of the U.S. Bank Tower, offering a staggeringly beautiful post-rain city view, which offers a good excuse to revisit former California poet laureate Dana Gioia’s classic poem, “Los Angeles After the Rain.”

— FIERCE AMBITION: Is L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath running for mayor of Los Angeles? The former West Hollywood mayor hasn’t ruled it out — and moved to the city a few months ago.

— WE’RE NOT IN TEXAS ANYMORE: Two more plaintiffs in L.A. County’s $4-billion sex abuse settlement have come forward to say they were told to invent their claims in exchange for cash. The allegations follow a Times investigation published earlier this month that found seven plaintiffs who claimed they received cash from recruiters to sue the county over sex abuse. Downtown LA Law Group, which filed cases for the plaintiffs, has denied involvement with the alleged recruiters.

— BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE: Meanwhile, the county is preparing to pay out an additional $828 million to another group of plaintiffs who say they were sexually abused in county facilities.

— GETTING OUT THE VOTE: Real estate developer Rick Caruso, the is-he-or-isn’t-he potential mayoral/gubernatorial candidate, is sending mailers to more than 45,000 voters who lived in fire-damaged sections of Pacific Palisades, Malibu and Altadena and now have temporary addresses. He advised them on how to update their voter registration by listing a temporary mailing address while also remaining in their original voting district, according to a Caruso spokesperson. Caruso is paying for the effort, which is nonpartisan and doesn’t mention any specific election. His team declined to provide the cost.

—SPEAKING OF CARUSO: Politico took a look at the mall magnate’s recent travels around the state, which have fueled speculation that he’s leaning toward a gubernatorial bid. The outlet reported that Caruso, who self-financed his 2022 mayoral campaign, recently met with Democratic megadonors Haim Saban and Ari Emanuel.

— THREE’S COMPANY: East Hollywood resident Dylan Kendall filed paperwork this week to challenge incumbent Hugo Soto–Martínez in next year’s race to represent Hollywood, Silver Lake, Echo Park and other neighborhoods. Kendall, a business owner who previously worked at the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, cited quality-of-life issues as the impetus for her candidacy. Political consultant Michael Trujillo and fundraiser Kat Connolly have joined her campaign. (One of Soto-Martínez’s upstairs neighbors, Colter Carlisle, is also running.)

— MORE FALLOUT FROM G: L.A. County Chief Executive Fesia Davenport received a $2-million payout this summer after telling the county supervisors she had experienced professional fallout from Measure G, a voter-approved ballot measure that will soon make her job obsolete.

— 1,000 DAYS LEFT: Bass reminded Angelenos on Friday that the start of the 2028 Olympic Games is just 1,000 days away. Appearing in Venice, she signed an executive directive streamlining preparations for the international event.

— BYE, JULIA: We are super bummed to report that this was erstwhile City Hall reporter Julia Wick‘s last week at The Times. She will miss all of you. But she says please keep in touch!

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program to combat homelessness went to Hollywood this week, focusing on the area around Santa Monica Boulevard and Heliotrope Drive in Soto-Martínez’s district.
• On the docket next week: The council’s public works committee takes up the issue of long-delayed sidewalk repairs, including the city’s obligations to make them wheelchair accessible.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to [email protected]. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

WASHINGTON — The very first thing you notice about the senior senator from West Virginia is that voice.

There is no doubt about it: Robert C. Byrd has the best voice in Washington.

It’s a deep yet tremulous 74-year-old voice that seems to descend upon the listener from on high, as if Byrd is somewhere above you, uttering eternal truths that are immediately being hammered into granite.

As he talks, Byrd dances through the octaves, carefully playing with his articulation of each vowel and consonant, surrounding his audience in the sweet darkness of sound.

Long, crafted pauses break his sentences, and during those silent moments time seems suspended; Byrd is then like nothing so much as a Shakespearean actor warming to the task.

The thought occurs that America is a safer place because Robert Byrd went into politics rather than into door-to-door sales.

Or is it?

“My voice, a political tool? I have never used my voice as a political tool,” insists Byrd in the sliding baritone that he has so often utilized as a political tool.

As he speaks, Byrd’s ornate Victorian-Era office in the Capitol Building is transformed into a personal stage. Beneath murals glorifying the Republic, Byrd paces the room, moves toward a shaft of sunlight and strikes a heroic pose beside a tall window.

He is a short, compact man, but his size belies the power of his presence. With his carefully coiffed silver hair, his high forehead and piercing eyes, and impeccably dressed in a vested dark suit, Byrd has the look of an important person not to be messed with, a fundamentalist preacher or a hanging judge.

Slowly, Byrd gets down to business. He moves to his desk, opens a drawer and pulls out a large black book. It is the Bible. Byrd turns to a coffee table in front of his audience, lifts the Bible and with sudden force slams the book down.

He slaps his hand onto the Bible. “Has Robert Byrd ever twisted arms to get the CIA to move jobs to West Virginia?”

His question to himself thunders through the room.

“Has Robert Byrd twisted arms at the FBI to move jobs to West Virginia?

“I swear on the Holy Bible that I have not!”

It is a bravura performance by the Senate’s premier dramatist.

Byrd, a Democrat, is here for some serious damage control. The former Senate majority leader and current chairman of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee is under attack as Congress returns later this month, and he wants to get his side told.

The charge that Byrd is answering: that he has used his sway over the appropriations process, the flow of money, in the Senate to move–no, his real foes would say steal–thousands upon thousands of government jobs and take them to his depressed Mountain State.

Byrd’s pork-barrel deals have prompted the kind of shock and outrage from his colleagues that has rarely been seen here since Jimmy Stewart filibustered Claude Rains’ crooked dam project in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.”

“Everyone in this body knows what’s going on,” Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.) warned darkly in a recent emotional rebuke to Byrd on the floor of the House. “We all know what’s taken place. I believe that actions like this . . . are disgraceful.”

Byrd’s efforts to move FBI and CIA facilities and thousands of jobs to West Virginia–immediately transforming rural hamlets there into international centers of law enforcement and intelligence gathering–have drawn special fire.

The attacks have come from such diverse sources as right-wing House Minority Whip Newt Gingrich (“It makes no sense at all except as a pure abuse of power,” Gingrich blasted) to Tom Clancy, best-selling novelist and friend of the CIA (“The Duke of West Virginia,” Clancy wrote in The Washington Post, “. . . is taking serfs from one fiefdom and moving them to another–his–in return for which he will deign to grant favors to those willing to support his legislative kidnaping”).

To be sure, pork has never gone out of style in Washington. There is a good reason, after all, why Congress seems so reluctant to cut the bloated defense budget, even after the collapse of the Soviet Evil Empire; it’s because the Pentagon and the nation’s military contractors have been so efficient at spreading their largess (factories and jobs) throughout almost every congressional district in the country.

So when others in Congress say they are shocked–shocked!–to find pork-barrel politics going on, their protestations may be just a wee bit disingenuous.

Still, Byrd has been catching flak because he seems to have gone beyond the pale, the accepted norms of pork. At least by the standards of modern Washington, that is, where special interests usually bring home the bacon through less showy practices–and without leaving so many tracks.

Indeed, perhaps Byrd’s biggest mistake was that he failed to follow convention and work through a bunch of shadowy lobbyists; he has instead done pork the old-fashioned way–by dint of his brute power over the legislative process.

Byrd denies that he has abused his power or exerted undue pressure to persuade federal agencies to locate jobs and facilities in West Virginia, yet he remains quite open in his desire to do more for his state.

He has, in fact, publicly devoted himself and the remainder of his Senate career to the cause of stimulating the moribund West Virginia economy through a massive injection of government money and jobs. He even set a goal: to bring $1 billion home with him in the space of five years.

He has already exceeded that objective in just three years, and the way he has gone about it is a lesson in congressional power.

In 1989, Byrd surprised official Washington by stepping down as Senate majority leader to become chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. To most political pundits, it was a puzzling move; after all, as majority leader Byrd was a national figure. He was trading in the status of statesman for the grubby world of an obscure committee post, and few outside the Senate saw the logic in it.

Yet Byrd, a senator since 1959 (and a congressman even before that, dating to 1953) understood where real power lay in Congress.

At least the kind of power that was useful to West Virginia.

A master of parliamentary procedure and a self-taught expert on the history of the Senate, Byrd knew that while the highly visible majority leader could control the scheduling and the legislative pace in the Senate, the real substance of the Senate’s business was conducted at the committee level. Arguably the most powerful committee of all was Appropriations; while other panels could create new programs, Appropriations controlled all the money to run those programs.

“I had been in the leadership for 22 years, and that’s a long time,” Byrd says. “I had been spending all my time on the floor and on matters affecting the nation. I felt it was time to move on. I’m glad I walked away from it.”

And so, after a career in the Senate leadership, what better way to help West Virginia than to take the helm of Appropriations, where Byrd would be in a position to pick and choose which government spending programs to ship back home?

Today, Byrd doesn’t deny the obvious benefits his committee post offers West Virginia. What is good for West Virginia, Byrd explains, is good for America.

“Naturally, my state is part of this union. A highway in West Virginia versus another state . . . one shouldn’t look at it as if it is a highway in Mexico. All of these states are part of the same country.” Byrd adds that others shouldn’t begrudge West Virginia. Quoting Daniel Webster, he notes: “We don’t put lines of latitude on what public works do or don’t benefit us.”

The result: By last fall, more than $500 million in proposed federal spending for West Virginia for fiscal 1992 alone was moving through the Appropriations process in the Senate, according to Congressional Quarterly, a Washington journal that tracks Congress. A list of Byrd’s West Virginia-bound pork, compiled by Congressional Quarterly in the middle of the fall’s congressional session, was impressive; it ranged from $165 million in highway improvements to $600,000 in research grants for the study of a replacement for lime fertilizer.

More visible projects included the transfer of a 90-worker data processing division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; an Internal Revenue Service center employing 300, and a 700-worker office of the Bureau of Public Debt.

But his greatest coup was the FBI’s national fingerprinting laboratory, bringing as many as 2,600 workers to Clarksburg, W.Va.

Byrd didn’t win so much for his depressed home state by relying on friendships with his fellow senators; on the contrary, he has been successful almost exclusively because of the power of his position and his unrivaled grasp of the legislative process in the Senate–and in spite of the fact that many of his colleagues view him as cold and aloof.

“I don’t have close friends in the Senate,” Byrd quietly acknowledges. He adds, with a measure of pride: “I don’t socialize with anybody. I haven’t played a round of golf in my life.”

But with few allies to rely on, Byrd’s West Virginia-first campaign finally ran aground late in 1991 in the face of mounting congressional opposition. Thus, when Byrd tried to take the CIA, or at least a big chunk of it, to West Virginia, the rest of Congress put its foot down.

The CIA and Byrd had earlier agreed to transfer 3,000 workers to a new CIA office center to be built in West Virginia, consolidating a series of smaller offices scattered throughout the Washington area.

But this time, Byrd’s critics had seen enough.

Quickly, the House Intelligence Committee labeled the plan a “covert action.” Condemnation spilled out of Congress: “If this wasn’t so pathetic, it would be funny,” complained Rep. David O’B. Martin (R-N.Y.).

Wolf, a Republican from the northern Virginia suburbs of Washington whose district includes CIA headquarters, noted that Byrd’s actions would mean the agency would have to change its name to the “Decentralized Intelligence Agency.”

Eventually, the full House defied Byrd and has at least temporarily blocked the move.

In the face of so much criticism, Byrd repeatedly has insisted that the CIA followed a legitimate site selection process in choosing West Virginia; he also stresses that he believes his honor was impugned in the House debate over the CIA project.

How has he responded to such personal attacks?

He insists–dramatically, of course–that he remains above the fray.

“Those are innuendoes, willful misrepresentations of the facts,” Byrd says.

The lawyerly words flow slowly but steadily, as if he is pulling warm licorice from his mouth.

“I have turned my cheek to all of the innuendoes,” Byrd says.

He says again, more emphatically: “I have turned my cheek.”

SAN FRANCISCO — About 24 hours after President Trump declared San Francisco such a crime-ridden “mess” that he was recommending federal forces be sent to restore order, Manit Limlamai, 43, and Kai Saetern, 32, rolled their eyes at the suggestion.

The pair — both in the software industry — were with friends Thursday in Dolores Park, a vibrant green space with sweeping views of downtown, playing volleyball under a blue sky and shining autumn sun. All around them, people sat on benches with books, flew kites, played with dogs or otherwise lounged away the afternoon on blankets in the grass.

Both Limlamai and Saetern said San Francisco of course has issues, and some rougher neighborhoods — but that’s any city.

“I’ve lived here for 10 years and I haven’t felt unsafe, and I’ve lived all over the city,” Saetern said. “Every city has its problems, and I don’t think San Francisco is any different,” but “it’s not a hellscape,” said Limlamai, who has been in the city since 2021.

Both said Trump’s suggestion that he might send in troops was more alarming than reassuring — especially, Limlamai said, on top of his recent remark that American cities should serve as “training grounds” for U.S. military forces.

“I don’t think that’s appropriate at all,” he said. “The military is not trained to do what needs to be done in these cities.”

Across San Francisco, residents, visitors and prominent local leaders expressed similar ideas — if not much sharper condemnation of any troop deployment. None shied away from the fact that San Francisco has problems, especially with homelessness. Several also mentioned a creeping urban decay, and that the city needs a bit of a polish.

But federal troops? That was a hard no.

A range of people on Market Street in downtown San Francisco on Thursday.

“It’s just more of [Trump’s] insanity,” said Peter Hill, 81, as he played chess in a slightly edgier park near City Hall. Hill said using troops domestically was a fascist power play, and “a bad thing for the entire country.”

“It’s fascism,” agreed local activist Wendy Aragon, who was hailing a cab nearby. Her Latino family has been in the country for generations, she said, but she now fears speaking Spanish on the street given that immigration agents have admitted targeting people who look or sound Latino, and troops in the city would only exacerbate those fears. “My community is under attack right now.”

State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) said troop deployments to the city were “completely unnecessary” and “typical Trump: petty, vindictive retaliation.”

“He wants to attack anyone who he perceives as an enemy, and that includes cities, and so he started with L.A. and Southern California because of its large immigrant community, and then he proceeded to cities with large Black populations like Chicago, and now he’s moving on to cities that are just perceived as very lefty like Portland and now San Francisco,” Wiener said.

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, defended such deployments and noted crime reductions in cities, including Washington, D.C., and Memphis, where local officials — including D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat — have embraced them.

“America’s once great cities have descended into chaos and crime as a result of Democrat policies that put criminals first and law-abiding citizens last. Making America Safe Again — especially crime-ridden cities — was a key campaign promise from the President that the American people elected him to fulfill,” Jackson said. “San Francisco Democrats should look at the tremendous results in DC and Memphis and listen to fellow Democrat Mayor Bowser and welcome the President in to clean up their city.”

A police officer shuts the door to his car after a person was allegedly caught carrying a knife near a sign promoting an AI-powered museum exhibit in downtown San Francisco.

A presidential ‘passion’

San Francisco — a bastion of liberal politics that overwhelmingly voted against Trump in the last election — has been derided by the conservative right for generations as a great American jewel lost to destructive progressive policies.

With its tech-heavy economy and downtown core hit hard by the pandemic and the nation’s shift toward remote work, the city has had a particularly rough go in recent years, which only exacerbated its image as a city in decline. That it produced some of Trump’s most prominent political opponents — including Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Vice President Kamala Harris — has only made it more of a punching bag.

In August, Trump suggested San Francisco needed federal intervention. “You look at what the Democrats have done to San Francisco — they’ve destroyed it,” he said in the Oval Office. “We’ll clean that one up, too.”

Then, earlier this month, to the chagrin of liberal leaders across the city, Marc Benioff, the billionaire Salesforce founder and Time magazine owner who has long been a booster of San Francisco, said in an interview with the New York Times that he supported Trump and welcomed Guard troops in the city.

“We don’t have enough cops, so if they can be cops, I’m all for it,” Benioff said, just as his company was preparing to open its annual Dreamforce convention in the city, complete with hundreds of private security officers.

The U.S. Constitution generally precludes military forces from serving in police roles in the U.S.

On Friday, Benioff reversed himself and apologized for his earlier stance. “Having listened closely to my fellow San Franciscans and our local officials, and after the largest and safest Dreamforce in our history, I do not believe the National Guard is needed to address safety in San Francisco,” he wrote on X.

He also apologized for “the concern” his earlier support for troops in the city had caused, and praised San Francisco’s new mayor, Daniel Lurie, for bringing crime down.

Billionaire Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla, also called for federal intervention in the city, writing on his X platform that downtown San Francisco is “a drug zombie apocalypse” and that federal intervention was “the only solution at this point.”

Trump made his latest remarks bashing San Francisco on Wednesday, again from the Oval Office.

Trump said it was “one of our great cities 10 years ago, 15 years ago,” but “now it’s a mess” — and that he was recommending federal forces move into the city to make it safer. “I’m gonna be strongly recommending — at the request of government officials, which is always nice — that you start looking at San Francisco,” he said to leading members of his law enforcement team.

Trump did not specify exactly what sort of deployment he meant, or which kinds of federal forces might be involved. He also didn’t say which local officials had allegedly requested help — a claim Wiener called a lie.

“Every American deserves to live in a community where they’re not afraid of being mugged, murdered, robbed, raped, assaulted or shot, and that’s exactly what our administration is working to deliver,” Trump said, before adding that sending federal forces into American cities had become “a passion” of his.

Kai Saetern, 32, was playing volleyball in Dolores Park on Thursday. Saetern said he has never felt unsafe living in neighborhoods all over the city for the last 10 years.

Crime is down citywide

The responses from San Francisco, both to Benioff and Trump, came swiftly, ranging from calm discouragement to full-blown outrage.

Lurie did not respond directly, but his office pointed reporters to his recent statements that crime is down 30% citywide, homicides are at a 70-year low, car break-ins are at a 22-year low and tent encampments are at their lowest number on record.

“We have a lot of work to do,” Lurie said. “But I trust our local law enforcement.”

San Francisco Dist. Atty. Brooke Jenkins was much more fiery, writing online that Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had turned “so-called public safety and immigration enforcement into a form of government sponsored violence against U.S. citizens, families, and ethnic groups,” and that she stood ready to prosecute federal officers if they harm city residents.

Attendees exit the Dreamforce convention downtown on Thursday in San Francisco.

“If you come to San Francisco and illegally harass our residents … I will not hesitate to do my job and hold you accountable just like I do other violators of the law every single day,” she said.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) — whose seat Wiener is reportedly going to seek — said the city “does not want or need Donald Trump’s chaos” and will continue to increase public safety locally and “without the interference of a President seeking headlines.”

Newsom said the use of federal troops in American cities is a “clear violation” of federal law, and that the state was prepared to challenge any such deployment to San Francisco in court, just as it challenged such deployments in Los Angeles earlier this year.

The federal appellate court that oversees California and much of the American West has so far allowed troops to remain in L.A., but is set to continue hearing arguments in the L.A. case soon.

Trump had used anti-immigration enforcement protests in L.A. as a justification to send troops there. In San Francisco, Newsom said, he lacks any justification or “pretext” whatsoever.

“There’s no existing protest at a federal building. There’s no operation that’s being impeded. I guess it’s just a ‘training ground’ for the President of United States,” Newsom said. “It is grossly illegal, it’s immoral, it’s rather delusional.”

Nancy DeStefanis, 76, a longtime labor and environmental activist who was at San Francisco City Hall on Thursday to complain about Golden Gate Park being shut to regular visitors for paid events, was similarly derisive of troops entering the city.

“As far as I’m concerned, and I think most San Franciscans are concerned, we don’t want troops here. We don’t need them,” she said.

Passengers walk past a cracked window from the Civic Center BART station in downtown San Francisco.

‘An image I don’t want to see’

Not far away, throngs of people wearing Dreamforce lanyards streamed in and out of the Moscone Center, heading back and forth to nearby Market Street and pouring into restaurants, coffee shops and take-out joints. The city’s problems — including homelessness and associated grittiness — were apparent at the corners of the crowds, even as chipper convention ambassadors and security officers moved would-be stragglers along.

Not everyone was keen to be identified discussing Trump or safety in the city, with some citing business reasons and others a fear of Trump retaliating against them. But lots of people had opinions.

Sanjiv, a self-described “techie” in his mid-50s, said he preferred to use only his first name because, although he is a U.S. citizen now, he emigrated from India and didn’t want to stick his neck out by publicly criticizing Trump.

He called homelessness a “rampant problem” in San Francisco, but less so than in the past — and hardly something that would justify sending in military troops.

“It’s absolutely ridiculous,” he said. “It’s not like the city’s under siege.”

Claire Roeland, 30, from Austin, Texas, said she has visited San Francisco a handful of times in recent years and had “mixed” experiences. She has family who live in surrounding neighborhoods and find it completely safe, she said, but when she’s in town it’s “predominantly in the business district” — where it’s hard not to be disheartened by the obvious suffering of people with addiction and mental illness and the grime that has accumulated in the emptied-out core.

“There’s a lot of unfortunate urban decay happening, and that makes you feel more unsafe than you actually are,” she said, but there isn’t “any realistic need to send in federal troops.”

She said she doesn’t know what troops would do other than confront homeless people, and “that’s an image I don’t want to see.”

Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

State Sen. Scott Wiener is a strategic and effective legislator who rarely lets emotion make his decisions — much like Nancy Pelosi, whose congressional seat he would like to take.

It has been a wide-open secret for years that Wiener wanted to make a run for federal office when or if Pelosi retired, but he’s also been deferential to the elder stateswoman of California politics and has made it equally clear that he would wait his turn in the brutal and parochial machine of San Francisco politics.

Until now.

The San Francisco Standard broke the news Thursday that Wiener is running on the 2026 ballot, though he has yet to formally announce.

It is news that shocked even those deep in the dog-eat-dog world of S.F. politics and ignited the inevitable news cycle about whether Pelosi (who was instrumental in removing President Biden from the 2024 race for age-related issues) is being Bidened herself. It also ensures a contentious race that will be nationally watched by both MAGA and the progressive left, both of which take issue with Wiener.

Oh, the drama.

Take it for what you will, but a few months after having hip replacement surgery, Pelosi is (literally) back in her stiletto heels and raising beaucoup dollars for Proposition 50, the ballot initiative meant to gerrymander California voting maps to counteract a GOP cheat-fest in Texas.

Yes, she’s 85, but she’s no Joe. She is also, however, no spring chicken. So the national debate on whether Democrats need not just fresh but younger candidates has officially landed in the City by the Bay, though Wiener remains both practical and polite enough to not frame it that way.

He’ll leave that to the journalists, who have hounded Pelosi for months to announce whether she will seek another term, a question she has declined to directly answer. Instead, her team has focused on the looming election for Proposition 50 and said any announcement on her future has to wait after the ballots are counted.

To be fair to Pelosi, she’s gone all-in to both fundraise and campaign for the redistricting effort, and its passage is essential to Democrats having even a shot at winning back any power in the midterms.

If Prop. 50 fails, there is no non-miracle path, except perhaps an unexpected blue wave, through which Democrats can retake a chamber. So Nov. 4 isn’t an arbitrary date. It will determine if there is any possibility of checking Trump’s power grab, and preserving democracy. Personally, I don’t fault Pelosi for being engaged in that fight.

To also be fair to Wiener, his decision to announce now was probably driven more by money and political momentum than by Pelosi’s age.

That’s because Pelosi already has a challenger — the ultra-wealthy progressive Saikat Chakrabarti, a startup millionaire who served as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign manager during her first upset win for Congress in 2018. Chakrabarti has long been an antagonist to Pelosi, and recently announced his candidacy, positioning himself as a disrupter.

In 2019, before the House impeached Trump over his questionable actions involving Ukraine, Chakrabarti tweeted, “Pelosi claims we can’t focus on impeachment because it’s a distraction from kitchen table issues. But I’d challenge you to find voters that can name a single thing House Democrats have done for their kitchen table this year. What is this legislative mastermind doing?”

Chakrabarti, who was born the year before Pelosi was first elected to Congress in 1987, has self-funded his campaign with $700,000 and has the financial ability to spend much more. Wiener, in his on-the-down-low shadow campaign, has raised a bit over $1 million, not nearly enough. The primary will be in June and it will be expensive.

Though we have yet to reach Halloween, a stroll down the aisles of any big box store can tell you that Christmas is neigh, a season when fundraising becomes harder — putting pressure on Wiener to raise money as quickly as possible before the winter freeze.

Add to that pressure the fact that Chakrabarti has political skills and growing popularity. He was the tech architect behind a successful push to activate volunteers for both AOC and Bernie Sanders.

An internal poll released a few months ago (and any internal poll must be viewed skeptically) showed Chakrabarti drawing 34% of voters to Pelosi’s 47%. His numbers increased as voters learned more about him — a few have even compared him to New York’s socialist wonder-kid Zohran Mamdani, currently running for mayor against Andrew Cuomo.

The problem with that is that Wiener is not Cuomo. He’s a progressive himself, and one with an established track record of getting stuff done, often progressive stuff.

I’ve watched him for years push ambitious agendas through the statehouse, including bills where I would have bet against him.

Most recently, he wrote the state’s ban on cops, including ICE, wearing masks. Although the feds have said they will ignore the new law, recently signed by Newsom, and it will almost certainly end up in court, it is a worthy message to send about secret police in America.

Wiener also this term passed a controversial housing bill that will increase density around transit hubs, and spearheaded a bill to regulate artificial intelligence.

In past terms, he has successfully forced insurance companies to cover mental health the same way they cover physical health; pushed large companies to disclose their climate impact; and been one of the major proponents of “YIMBY” policies that make it easier to build housing.

He has also passed numerous laws protecting immigrant and LGBTQ+ rights, which has made him a favorite target of the far right. He has received death threats on a regular basis for years, including one from an anti-vaxxer who was convicted on seven counts in 2022 after threatening Wiener and being found in possession of weapons. Wiener doesn’t have Pelosi’s charisma, but he has receipts for getting the job done and handling the vicious vitriol of modern politics.

Unlike Chakrabarti, Wiener has also been a part of San Francisco’s insular community for decades, and has his own base of support — though he is considered a moderate to Chakrabarti’s progressiveness. This is where San Francisco gets wonderfully weird. In nearly any other place, Wiener would be solidly left. But some of his constituents view him as too developer-friendly for his housing policies and have criticized his past policies around expanding conservatorships for mentally ill people.

But still, a recent poll done by EMC research but not released publicly found that 61% of likely primary voters have a favorable opinion of Wiener. That vastly outpaces the 21% that said the same about Chakrabarti or even the 21% who liked Pelosi’s daughter, Christine Pelosi, who has also been mentioned as a possible successor.

Which is all to say that Wiener is in a now-or-never moment. He has popularity but needs momentum and cash. The Democratic Party is in a mess, and the old rules are out the window, even in San Francisco.

So waiting for Pelosi had become a little bit like waiting for Godot, a self-imposed limbo that was more likely to lead to frustration than victory.

Standing behind a lectern emblazoned with the words “Cutting Utility Bills,” Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law last month a package of energy bills that he said “reduces the burden on ratepayers.”

Tucked into one of those bills: a paragraph that could allow Southern California Edison to shift billions of dollars of Eaton fire damage costs to its customers.

Among other things, the bill allows Edison to start charging customers for any Eaton fire costs exceeding the state’s $21-billion wildfire fund.

“I was shocked to see that,” said April Maurath Sommer, executive director of the Wild Tree Foundation, which tracks state government actions on utility-sparked fires. “It’s effectively a bailout.”

Other amendments in the 231-page bill known as SB 254 helped not just Edison, but all three of the state’s biggest for-profit utilities, further limiting the costs that they and their shareholders would face if the companies’ equipment ignited a catastrophic wildfire.

Previous legislation championed by Newsom, a 2019 bill known as AB 1054, already had sharply limited the utilities’ liabilities for wildfires they cause.

Staff in the governor’s office declined a request for an interview. In a statement, Daniel Villasenor, a spokesman for Newsom, called SB 254 “smart public policy, not a giveaway.”

Newsom’s staff noted that the state Public Utilities Commission would later review Eaton fire costs, determining if they were “just and reasonable.” If some costs billed to customers were rejected in that review, Edison shareholders would have to reimburse them for those amounts, the governor’s office said.

According to the legislation, that review of costs isn’t required until all Eaton claims are settled, leaving the possibility that customers would have to cover even costs found to be unreasonable for years.

“That will be expensive news to a lot of people,” said Michael Boccadoro, executive director of the Agricultural Energy Consumers Assn. “It is unfortunately what happens when major policies are done in the final hours of the Legislature with little transparency.”

Damages for the Eaton fire have been estimated to be as high as $45 billion — which could greatly exceed the $21-billion fund.

Homes in Altadena lay in ruins after the Eaton fire.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Sheri Scott, an actuary at Milliman, told state officials in July that insured losses alone range from $13.7 billion to $22.8 billion. That estimate doesn’t include payments to families who were uninsured or underinsured, or compensation for pain and suffering.

The bill allows Edison to issue bonds secured by new payments from its electric customers for Eaton fire costs that can’t be covered by the $21-billion fund.

Kathleen Dunleavy, an Edison spokeswoman, said the company supported the bill’s language because the bonds secured by customer payments provide a lower cost of borrowing than if the company used traditional financing. “Every dollar counts for our customers,” Dunleavy said.

“There are a lot of variables here,” Dunleavy added. “The investigation is ongoing and there is not an estimate of the total cost of the Eaton fire.”

Newsom’s office noted that under the amendments the utilities won’t get to earn a profit on $6 billion of wildfire prevention expenditures. Customers will still have to pay for the costs, but they won’t be charged extra for shareholders’ profit.

Since early this year, Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric had been lobbying Newsom and state legislative leaders, urging them to bolster the $21-billion fund because of concerns it could be exhausted by the Eaton fire’s extraordinary cost.

Videos captured the Jan. 7 inferno igniting under a century-old transmission line that Edison had not used for 50 years. The wildfire swept through Altadena, destroying 9,400 homes and other structures and killing at least 19 people.

Edison now faces hundreds of lawsuits filed by victims. The suits accuse Edison of negligence, claiming it failed to safely maintain its equipment and left in place the unused transmission line, which lawyers say Edison knew posed a fire risk.

“We’ll respond to the allegations in the litigation,” Dunleavy said, adding that the company inspects and maintains idle lines in the same way as its energized lines.

Even though the government’s investigation into the cause has not been released, Edison announced in July that it was starting a program to directly pay victims for damages.

The company has also begun settling with insurance companies that paid out claims for properties they insured in Altadena that were destroyed or damaged.

Limiting Edison’s liability for Eaton fire

The utility is expecting to be reimbursed for most or all of the settlements and the costs of the fire by the $21-billion wildfire fund that Newsom and lawmakers created through the 2019 legislation, according to a July update Edison gave to its investors.

The first $1 billion of damages is covered by an insurance policy paid by its customers.

After state officials warned that the Eaton fire could deplete the state fund, Newsom said in July he was working on a plan to create an additional fund of $18 billion.

Two days before the Legislature was scheduled to recess for the year, three lawmakers added complex language to SB 254 to create what Newsom called the new $18-billion wildfire “continuation account.” Before the bill was amended, consumer groups had been supporting it because it aimed to save electric customers money.

The late amendments required the Legislature to extend its session by a day to meet a state constitutional rule that says proposed legislation must be public for 72 hours before a final vote.

“It’s impossible to believe that legislators could have understood all of this in 72 hours,” Maurath Sommer said. She noted that Newsom’s 2019 law, AB 1054, was introduced and quickly passed in a similar manner. “And it is clear now how poorly that effort fared in achieving the claimed objective of protecting public safety.”

Boccadoro said he believed the amendments were added to a bill favored by consumer groups to give it “some political cover.”

Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris (D-Irvine), one of bill’s authors, said she believed utilities needed protection from wildfire liabilities because of a legal doctrine in California known as inverse condemnation, which makes them responsible for damages even if they weren’t negligent in starting it.

“This is the best possible deal for ratepayers as we navigate the truly devastating impacts of the climate crisis,” Petrie-Norris said of the legislation. The other two authors — state Sens. Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park) and Aisha Wahab (D-Hayward) — did not respond to requests for interviews.

After the bill passed, both Edison and PG&E praised its provisions in presentations for investors.

Edison called the bill “a key action” that demonstrated lawmakers’ support of its “financial stability.”

The amendments added to the protections that utilities gained in 2019 through Newsom’s AB 1054. At that time, PG&E was in bankruptcy proceedings. It had filed for protection after its transmission line was found to have ignited the 2018 Camp fire, which killed 85 people and destroyed most of the town of Paradise.

PG&E explained in a September presentation that before Newsom and lawmakers changed the law in 2019, utilities that wanted to pass fire damage costs to customers “bore the burden of proving” that their conduct related to the blaze was reasonable and prudent.

Newsom’s 2019 law changed that standard, PG&E said, so that the utility’s conduct was automatically deemed reasonable if state regulators had granted the company what the law called a safety certificate.

Since 2019, the state has regularly issued the companies these certificates — even when regulators find maintenance and safety problems.

Edison received a safety certificate less than a month before the Eaton fire, even though it had thousands of open work orders, including some on the transmission lines in the canyon where the fire started.

To get a certificate, the utilities must submit a plan to state regulators for preventing their equipment from sparking fires. They also must tie executive pay to the company’s safety performance, with bonuses expected to take a hit when more fires are sparked or people are killed.

Even though Edison failed at key safety measures last year, The Times found that cash bonuses for four of its top five executives rose. The company said that was because of their performance on responsibilities beyond safety.

With a safety certificate in hand, Edison told investors in July that the maximum it would pay for the Eaton fire under the law’s limit was $3.9 billion, a fraction of the expected costs. The utility said the wildfire fund would reimburse it for all the costs, unless an outside party can raise “serious doubt” that it had not acted reasonably before the fire.

The SB 254 amendments also clarified key language in the 2019 law — clarifications that Edison told investors in September were “constructive for potential Eaton fire losses.”

That language allows utilities that cause repeated major wildfires within a period of three years to reduce what they must pay back to the fund for a second fire if they are found to have acted imprudently.

“This certainly does not seem to encourage utilities to stop causing fires,” Maurath Sommer said of the provision.

Edison’s Dunleavy dismissed concern about the provision. “Safety remains our top priority,” she said.

Campaign contributions to Newsom

The three utilities have long been generous political donors to both Democrats and Republicans in California, including to Newsom and current legislative leaders in Sacramento.

Edison, for example, gave $100,000 to Newsom’s campaign last year to pass the mental health initiative known as Proposition 1.

This summer Edison gave $190,000 to the state Democratic Party, which is helping Newsom campaign for Proposition 50, which would redraw congressional districts.

Newsom’s staff didn’t respond to questions about the contributions.

Dunleavy said that the company’s political donations are not charged to customers. She said Edison gives contributions to politicians who share its commitment to “safely serve our customers.”

Newsom said in 2019 that the bill capping utilities’ fire liabilities would “move our state toward a safer, affordable and reliable energy future.”

He and lawmakers said the law would make the public safer by requiring the utilities to do more to prevent fires, including aggressive tree trimming and the installation of more insulated wires.

Even though the utilities have raised electric rates to charge customers for billions of dollars of fire prevention work, their electrical equipment continues to spark blazes.

According to Cal Fire statistics, if the Eaton fire is confirmed to have been ignited by Edison’s transmission line, at least seven of the state’s 20 most destructive wildfires would have been caused by the three utilities’ power lines. Two of those utility-sparked fires happened after the 2019 law passed.

Edison’s lines ignited 178 fires last year — 45% more compared with 2019. The company attributed last year’s increase to weather conditions that created more dry vegetation.

The governor’s staff said they disagreed with claims that the legislation reduced utilities’ accountability. They pointed to a measure in the 2019 law that requires a utility to reimburse the wildfire fund for all damages from a fire if its actions are found to constitute “conscious or willful disregard of the rights and safety of others.”

Advocates for utility customers have repeatedly said they believe that standard is too high to keep California utilities from causing more fires.

“Instances of utility mismanagement could easily fall short of the ‘conscious or willful disregard’ standard yet nonetheless cause a series of catastrophic wildfire events,” wrote the commission’s Public Advocates Office in a filing soon after the 2019 law passed.

A proposal to explore removing Los Angeles police officers from traffic enforcement is stuck in gridlock. Again.

The initiative to take the job of pulling over bad drivers away from cops is months behind schedule, frustrating reform advocates and some city leaders who argue that Los Angeles is missing an on-ramp toward the future of road safety.

Local officials first raised the prospect during the national reckoning on racial injustice that followed the police killing of George Floyd in 2020, but the plan has progressed in sluggish fits and starts since then. Backers thought that they had scored an important victory with the release in May 2023 of a long-promised study mapping out how most enforcement could be done by unarmed civilian workers.

Last summer, the City Council requested follow-up reports from various city departments to figure out how to do that and gave a three-month deadline. But more than year later, most of the promised feasibility studies have yet to materialize.

“I’m very upset about the delay,” said Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, one of the proposal’s early champions. “Generally speaking, when you try to do a big reform like this, at least some portion of the people who want to do the work are very motivated to change the status quo — and I don’t think we have that here.”

He said there was blame to go around for the continued delays, but that he’s encouraged by his conversations with officials from the involved departments that studies will be completed — a precursor to legislation that would allow for re-imagining traffic safety.

At the same time, he said that he still saw a role for armed police in certain traffic situations.

“I don’t even think we need to be pulling people over at all for vehicle violations, especially for those that don’t pose any public safety risks,” he said, before adding: “If somebody’s going 90 miles an hour down Crenshaw Boulevard, that person does need to be stopped immediately and they do need to be stopped by somebody with a gun.”

In a unanimous vote in June 2024, the council directed city transportation staff and other departments to come back within 90 days with feasibility reports about the cost and logistics of numerous proposals, including creating unarmed civilian teams to respond to certain traffic issues and investigate accidents. Also under exploration were ideas to limit fines in poorer communities and end stops for minor infractions, such as expired tags or air fresheners hanging from the rearview mirror.

Of the dozen or so requests made by the council, only two reports by the city’s transportation department have been completed so far, officials said.

Both of the studies — one assessing parking and traffic fines, and the other looking at how so-called “self-enforcing infrastructure” such as adding more speed bumps, roundabouts and other street modifications could help reduce speeding and unsafe driving — are “pending” before an ad hoc council committee focused on unarmed alternatives to police, according to an LADOT spokesman. The committee will need to approve the reports before they can be acted on by the full council, he said in a brief statement.

Chief Legislative Analyst Sharon Tso, the council’s top policy advisor, said she understands frustration over the delays. She said the protracted timeline was also at least partly caused by difficulties in obtaining reliable data from some of the participating departments, but declined to point any fingers. Two additional reports are in the final stages of being finalized and should be released by the end of the year, she said.

Although top LAPD officials have in the past signaled a willingness to relinquish certain traffic duties, others inside the department have dismissed similar proposals as fanciful and argued the city needs to crack down harder on reckless driving at a time when traffic fatalities have outpaced homicides citywide.

Privately, some police supervisors and officers complain about what they see as left-leaning politicians and activists taking away an effective tool for helping to get guns and drugs off the streets. They argue that traffic stops — if conducted properly and constitutionally — are also a deterrent for erratic driving.

A recently passed state law allowed the use of use of automated speeding cameras on a pilot basis in L.A. and a handful of other California cities.

Some advocates, however, are leery of relying on technology and punitive fines that can continue historical harms, particularly for communities of color.

“It’s been just a big bureaucratic slog,” said Chauncee Smith, of Catalyst California, which is part of a broader coalition of reform advocacy groups pushing for an end to all equipment and moving violation stops.

While L.A. has spent more than a year finishing a “study of a study,” he said, places such as Virginia, Connecticut and Philadelphia have taken meaningful action to transform traffic enforcement by passing bans on certain types of low-level police stops.

He cited mounting research in other cities that showed road improvements along high-injury street corridors were more effective at changing driver behaviors, ultimately reducing the number of traffic-related deaths and serious injuries more than the threat of being ticketed. But he also acknowledged the difficulty of making such changes in L.A.’s notoriously fragmented approach to planning and delivering infrastructure projects.

Smith and other advocates have also argued for an outright ban on so-called pretextual stops, in which police use a minor violation as justification to stop someone in order to investigate whether a more serious crime has occurred.

The LAPD has reined in the practice in recent years under intense public pressure but never abandoned it. Further changes could require legislation and are likely to face stiff opposition from police unions such as the Los Angeles Police Protective League, which has been highly vocal in its criticism of the pretext policy change.

Leslie Johnson, chief culture officer for Community Coalition, a South L.A.-based nonprofit , said that despite the delays the organization plans to press ahead with efforts to reimagine public safety and to keep pressure on public officials to ensure the study results don’t get buried like past efforts. She said that there is renewed urgency to push through the changes after a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that critics says has opened the door to widespread racial profiling.

“Even though we’re a sanctuary city, we’re concerned that these prextexual stops could be leveraged” by federal immigration authorities, she said.

EUCLID, Ohio — Campaigning in a key battleground state, Mitt Romney said Monday that President Obama has failed in his promises to reduce unemployment, improve the nation’s housing market and right the nation’s economy.

“At the convention, the Democratic Convention about four years ago, the president got up and spoke about hope, change and together we can do anything. But he hasn’t lived up to those kinds of expectations,” Romney told hundreds of people gathered in a heavy gauge-stamping warehouse just outside Cleveland. “The American people are good-hearted people with the desire for good things to happen to one another and we hoped that this president would be able to be successful. I sure did. And he has not been. I know how many people are struggling. I want to do my very best to help them and I’m convinced that my experience will help me get this economy going and get people back to work and good jobs, which they need.”

Romney made his remarks while campaigning in Ohio, a state that has picked every president since 1964 and where Obama officially kicked off his reelection bid Saturday. The GOP candidate’s comments, six months before the election, come the same day that two new polls showed the men in a statistical dead heat, and on the day that Obama launched a $25-million monthlong television ad buy in Ohio and eight other swing states.

Romney did not mention the ad or Obama’s appearance here over the weekend, but he argued that by Obama’s own benchmarks, such as getting unemployment below 8%, and other indicators such as a drop in median incomes and rising healthcare, food and fuel costs, the president’s policies have not worked.

“Americans in the middle class are feeling squeezed, even if they have a job. And obviously most of our citizens have a job, but boy, these are tough times,” Romney said.

A Romney backer who introduced the presumptive GOP nominee said Obama does not understand the middle class.

“I’m tired about hearing him talk about the middle class as though he knows anything about us,” said state auditor Dave Yost to loud applause, before reeling off a list of vacations the Obamas have taken since coming to the White House.

Yost said the tally was 17 vacations, including one last Christmas that cost $1.5 million. “Mr. President, that’s not middle class. And you stop lecturing us about our lives!”

Follow Politics Now on Twitter

[email protected]

Original source: Romney focuses on Obama’s economic record in Ohio

Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday appointed 13 judges to Superior Court seats, including four posts in Los Angeles County. All but one of the appointees are Democrats.

Brown filled the Los Angeles County Superior Court vacancies with Julie Fox Blackshaw, deputy counsel to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa; H. Jay Ford, currently a commissioner in the county court; Gregorio Roman, a deputy public defender; and private-practice lawyer Douglas Stern of Rancho Palos Verdes.

Blackshaw was a federal court special master from 2002 to 2010, and before that served as legal counsel for a Los Angeles police review commission. She takes the seat being vacated by the retirement of Judge Joan Comparet-Cassani.

In a 1992 story in The Times, Blackshaw was credited with winning the then-largest criminal fine ever levied in a defense contracting fraud case, while working part-time as an assistant U.S. attorney and taking care of her infant daughter.

Brown also named Tracie L. Brown, Harry M. Dorfman and Rochelle C. East to judgeships in the San Francisco County Superior Court, and Erin Alexander and Lisa Rogan to judgeships in the San Bernardino County Superior Court.

He appointed Patricia Guerrero and Michael Popkins to the San Diego County Superior Court.

ALSO:

California fires contractor on tech project

Overhaul of state payroll system at risk of collapse

Half-finished $208-million DMV technology overhaul canceled

[email protected]

Were California voters especially wise Tuesday when they adopted both Proposition 25, which erases the Legislature’s crippling two-thirds vote requirement for adopting a budget, and Proposition 26, which imposes a new two-thirds mandate for imposing or raising a fee? End the gridlock, perhaps they were saying, but not at the expense of taxpaying families or businesses.

Or were they being especially clueless, telling Democratic lawmakers to adopt the budget they want, but without knowing or caring that they were simultaneously making the job close to impossible by depriving those same politicians of one of their chief budget-balancing tools?

It’s tempting but in the end pointless to try to find a consistent voter philosophy among the confusing and often contradictory ballot measures. The electorate’s role is to say “yes” or “no” to individual questions; it’s up to their elected leaders and representatives to make those decisions work. In the coming year, lawmakers and the once-and-future Gov. Jerry Brown will be presented with an opportunity in Proposition 25, the majority-vote budget, possibly the most important reform adopted at the ballot box in a generation. They will have to demonstrate wisdom, leadership and self-restraint to take good advantage of it without being snared by Proposition 26 and the other ballot-box budgeting mandates sent them by voters in this election and others over the last 30 years.

California’s persistent fiscal mess is based less on poor budget decisions in Sacramento than it is on the inability to make a decision of any kind. At the heart of the problem has been the two-thirds supermajority requirement, imposed by voters in three stages. First, during the Depression, voters decided that no budget could be passed in a slow-growth year without the approval of two-thirds of the members of each house of the Legislature. Then, in the 1960s, the two-thirds requirement was extended to include all budgets in all years. Then, in 1978 as part of Proposition 13, it was applied to all tax increases as well. Proposition 25 undoes the two-thirds requirement only on budgets. It remains in place on taxes and, in fact, is now, under Proposition 26, extended to fees.

Now, like every other state in the nation but two, California will be able to adopt a budget on a majority vote (as long as that budget doesn’t include any tax or fee hikes). It’s an important step up from deadlock and stasis, and holds the prospect of returning the Legislature to a measure of accountability that it has too long eluded.

Majority votes form the core of democracy. A majority is a mathematically unique number. Any deviation from majority rule in a legislative body gives disproportionate power to the minority. Require less than a majority, and a small cabal can have its way. Require a supermajority, and an equally small group can stymie the will of the majority by repeatedly saying “no.” In California’s Legislature, the minority party — the Republicans — has held fast to that power, arguing that it is the last check on irresponsible spending. But the result has been a budget process that stretches well past the constitutional June 15 deadline, and that delay has, in turn, damaged California’s reputation and creditworthiness far more than any cuts sought by GOP lawmakers or taxes proposed by Democrats.

Conservatives should also recognize that Democrats have been able to use the requirement to shirk accountability. No more. Democratic lawmakers must now stand behind their budgets. The electorate — especially the large and growing number of decline-to-state voters — will know exactly whom to hold responsible if the next budget is late or unbalanced.

No doubt Democrats would like to be able to raise taxes on a majority vote as well, and, in fact, the same principles that make two-thirds wrong for budgeting make it wrong for taxes. But for the present voters don’t appear to agree with them. Meanwhile, Democrats need no longer bargain away substantive and non-budget-related policy points merely to score Republican budget support. They may bargain for GOP support on taxes, but they have a choice.

Proposition 25 is a useful new tool, but it alone doesn’t solve the state government’s structural problems. In passing Proposition 22, voters cut off another source of state funds by protecting redevelopment agencies and local governments. Of course, those very agencies and governments would have run out of their own funds and gone bankrupt many times had they not been bailed out by Sacramento after Proposition 13 and then after the reduction of the vehicle license fee in the 1990s. When the state “raids” local treasuries, it is merely taking back its own money — money it can no longer afford to give away. But voters have made clear repeatedly that they prefer funding for local programs. In rejecting Proposition 21, a new vehicle fee to support parks, voters said no to the fee but presumably didn’t say no to state parks, which still must be funded — or lost to posterity.

Now more than ever it becomes the responsibility of Brown and the legislative majority to remind Californians that institutions that make a safe, just and abundant life here possible — courts, disaster preparedness, the Highway Patrol, water systems, schools and universities — are a bargain but nevertheless require funding.