governors

FREDERICKSBURG, Va. — If there’s agreement on anything in the two states with governor’s races this year, it’s that utility bills are a growing concern among voters.

One Virginia voter, Kim Wilson, lamented at a town hall recently that her electricity bill seems to go up every month, no matter how much she tries to mitigate the costs. She was drawn to the event in part by its title: “The energy bills are too damn high.”

“It’s way too high,” Wilson readily agreed.

In New Jersey, Herb Michitsch of Kenilworth said his electric bill has climbed to nearly $400 a month, or more than four times what it was when he and his wife moved into their home half a century ago.

“Something really has to be done,” Michitsch said.

That something must be done is pretty much where the agreement ends. It’s what must be done that splits politicians back into rival camps.

Democratic candidates in the two states are far more likely to embrace clean energy options like wind and solar than their Republican opponents. The two states’ Republican nominees are more closely aligned with the policies of President Trump, who has called climate change a “con job” and promotes more traditional energy sources like gas and coal. New Jersey Republican nominee Jack Ciattarelli has acknowledged that human-caused climate change is occurring, but he says Democrats have driven up costs with their clean energy push.

Which side voters land on in the off-year elections will give both parties plenty to consider in what feels destined to be an emerging economic issue heading into next year’s midterm elections.

At a recent rally in New Jersey, Democratic state Sen. Vin Gopal made clear that he stood with Democratic nominee Mikie Sherrill in support of her plans to lower costs. But Gopal acknowledged that the outcome could signal whether voters are ready to embrace the president’s approach or have simply grown weary of national politics.

“The whole country is watching what happens,” he said.

Technology drives up costs

The debate comes as people in the two states grapple with double-digit percentage increases in monthly electricity bills. The exploding costs are driven by soaring demand, particularly from data centers, and by the rapid onset of energy-intensive artificial intelligence technology. Virginia’s largest energy utility also has linked potential future rate increases to inflation and other costs.

In Virginia’s open race to succeed a term-limited GOP incumbent, Democrat Abigail Spanberger and Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears are at odds over the development of renewable energy sources.

Spanberger has laid out a plan to expand solar and wind production in underused locations, praising a wind project off the coast of Virginia Beach. In a debate against her opponent, she also said she would “ensure that data centers pay their fair share” as costs rise. The state is home to the world’s largest data center market,

Republican Winsome Earle-Sears wasn’t having it.

“That’s all she wants, is solar and wind,” Earle-Sears said of Spanberger at the debate. “Well, if you look outside, the sun isn’t shining and the breeze isn’t blowing, and then what, Abigail, what will you do?”

In New Jersey, where Ciattarelli’s endorsement by Trump included recent social media posts praising his energy affordability plans, the GOP nominee blames rising costs on eight years of Democratic control of state government.

Ciattarelli says he would pull New Jersey out of a regional greenhouse gas trading bloc, which Democratic incumbent Gov. Phil Murphy reentered when he first took office in 2018.

“It’s been a failure,” Ciattarelli said at the final debate of the campaign. “Electricity is at an all-time high.”

He’s also come out as a strident opponent of wind energy off the state’s coast, an effort Democrats spearheaded under Murphy. A major offshore wind project ground to a halt when the Danish company overseeing it scrapped projects, citing supply chain problems and high interest rates.

At the center of Sherrill’s campaign promise on the issue is an executive order to freeze rates and build cheaper and cleaner power generation.

“I know my opponent laughs at it,” Sherrill said recently.

A growing concern among voters

The candidates’ focus on affordability and utility rates reflects an unease among voters. A recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found electricity bills are a “major” source of stress for 36% of U.S. adults, at a time when data center development for AI could further strain the power grid.

Perhaps that’s why the statewide races have become something of an energy proxy battle in Virginia. Clean Virginia, a clean energy advocacy group that targets utility corruption, has backed all three Democratic candidates for statewide office in Virginia — a first for the organization. GOP statewide candidates, meanwhile, have accepted money from Dominion Energy, the largest electric utility in Virginia.

To further complicate an already complex issue: Virginia has passed the Virginia Clean Economy Act, which calls for utilities to sunset carbon energy production methods by 2045.

Republican House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore, who represents the southwest edge of Virginia, had failed to alter part of the state’s Clean Economy Act earlier this year. Kilgore, whose top donor is Dominion Energy, said in February: “If their bills go any higher, there are folks in my region that are not able to pay them now, they’re definitely not going to be able to pay them in the future.”

Evan Vaughn, executive director of MAREC Action, a group of Mid-Atlantic renewable energy developers, said candidates from both parties are in a tough spot because bringing down prices quickly will be difficult given broader market dynamics.

“Voters should look to which candidate they think can do the best to stabilize prices by bringing more generation online,” he said. “That’s really going to be the key to affordability.”

Michitsch, who’s backing Sherrill in the governor’s race and said he would campaign for her, said her proposal shows she’s willing to do something to address spiraling costs.

“We need to change,” he said. “And I think she is here to change things.”

Diaz and Catalini write for the Associated Press.

A group of Democratic state governors has launched a new alliance aimed at coordinating their public health efforts.

They’re framing it as a way to share data, messages about threats, emergency preparedness and public health policy — and as a rebuke to President Trump’s administration, which they say isn’t doing its job in public health.

“At a time when the federal government is telling the states, ‘you’re on your own,’ governors are banding together,” Maryland Governor Wes Moore said in a statement.

The formation of the group touches off a new chapter in a partisan battle over public health measures that has been heightened by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s advisers declining to recommend COVID-19 vaccinations, instead leaving the choice to the individual.

Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said in an email that Democratic governors who imposed school closures and mask mandates, including for toddlers, at the height of the pandemic, are the ones who “destroyed public trust in public health.”

“The Trump Administration and Secretary Kennedy are rebuilding that trust by grounding every policy in rigorous evidence and Gold Standard Science – not the failed politics of the pandemic,” Nixon said.

The initial members are all Democrats

The Governors Public Health Alliance bills itself as a “nonpartisan coordinating hub,” but the initial members are all Democrats — the governors of 14 states plus Guam.

Among them are governors of the most populous blue states, California and New York, and several governors who are considered possible 2028 presidential candidates, including California’s Gavin Newsom, Illinois’ JB Pritzker and Maryland’s Moore.

The idea of banding together for public health isn’t new for Democratic governors. They formed regional groups to address the pandemic during Trump’s first term and launched new ones in recent months amid uncertainty on federal vaccine policy. States have also taken steps to preserve access to COVID-19 vaccines.

The new alliance isn’t intended to supplant those efforts, or the coordination already done by the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, its organizers say.

A former CDC director is among the advisers

Dr. Mandy Cohen, who was CDC director under former President Biden and before that the head of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, is part of a bipartisan group of advisers to the alliance.

“The CDC did provide an important backstop for expertise and support,” she said. “And I think now with some of that gone, it’s important for states to make sure that they are sharing best practices, and that they are coordinating, because the problems have not gone away. The health threats have not gone away.”

Other efforts have also sprung up to try to fill roles that the CDC performed before the ouster of a director, along with other restructuring and downsizing.

The Governors Public Health Alliance has support from GovAct, a nonprofit, nonpartisan donor-funded initiative that also has projects aimed at protecting democracy and another partisan hot-button issue, reproductive freedom.

Mulvihill and Stobbe write for the Associated Press.

San Diego Democrat and former state Senate leader Toni Atkins dropped out of the 2026 California governor’s race Monday, part of a continued reshuffling and contraction of the wide field of candidates vying to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Atkins told supporters in a letter Monday afternoon that during a childhood in rural Virginia, she often felt “too country, too poor, too gay” to fit in. After building a life on the West Coast, where she found acceptance and opportunity, she worked for decades to build on “the promise of California” and extend it to future generations, she said.

“That’s why it’s with such a heavy heart that I’m stepping aside today as a candidate for governor,” Atkins wrote. “Despite the strong support we’ve received and all we’ve achieved, there is simply no viable path forward to victory.”

Atkins began her political career on the San Diego City Council after serving as a women’s clinic administrator. She became the first out LGBTQ+ person to serve as Senate president pro tem, the top position in the California Senate. She was also the speaker of the state Assembly, making her the first legislator since 1871 to hold both leadership posts.

In Sacramento, Atkins was a champion for affordable housing and reproductive rights, including writing the legislation that became Proposition 1 in 2022, codifying abortion rights in the California Constitution after national protections were undone by the U.S. Supreme Court.

With President Trump and his allies “gutting health care, cratering our economy, and stripping away fundamental rights and freedoms,” Atkins told supporters Monday, “we’ve got to make sure California has a Democratic governor leading the fight, and that means uniting as Democrats.”

Under California’s nonpartisan primary system, the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, advance to the general election. Votes on the left could be fractured among a half-dozen Democratic candidates, creating a more viable path forward for one of the two high-profile Republicans in the race to make it to the November ballot.

Atkins picked up millions of dollars in donations after entering the governor’s race in January 2024, and reported having $4.3 million on hand — more than most candidates — at the end of the first half of the year. More recent reports from major donations suggest her fundraising had lagged behind former Orange County-based U.S. Rep. Katie Porter, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and former state Atty. Gen. and Biden appointee Xavier Becerra.

Although well-known in political circles, Atkins is not a household name. Recent polls, including one conducted by UC Berkeley and co-sponsored by The Times, showed her support in the single digits.

Nine months before the primary, the field of candidates is still in flux, and many voters are undecided.

At the end of July, former Vice President Kamala Harris made the biggest news of the campaign when she said she would not run. Shortly afterward, her political ally Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis abandoned her gubernatorial bid and announced she would run for state treasurer.

Some polling has shown that Porter, who left Congress after losing a bid for a rare open seat in the U.S. Senate, is the candidate to beat.

Last week, lobbyist and former state legislative leader Ian Calderon, 39, launched his campaign for governor, calling it the advent of a “new generation of leadership.”

Calderon, 39, was the first millennial elected to the state Assembly and the youngest-ever majority leader of the state Assembly. He is part of a political dynasty from southeastern Los Angeles County that’s held power in Sacramento for decades.

His family’s name was clouded during his time in Sacramento when two of his uncles served prison time in connection with a bribery scheme, but Calderon was not accused of wrongdoing.

The governor of Utah has been criticised after he said he prayed that the man suspected of shooting Charlie Kirk “wouldn’t be one of us.” In Friday’s briefing, US officials revealed that 22-year-old Tyler Robinson had been arrested and that he had engraved messages on bullets.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris’ decision to forgo a run for California governor has created a wide-open race in next year’s election to run the nation’s most populous state, according to a poll released Tuesday by UC Berkeley and the Los Angeles Times.

Nearly 4 in 10 registered voters surveyed said they are uncertain about whom they will support in the 2026 contest to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom.

“It’s very unsettled. Most of the voters, the plurality in this poll, are undecided,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the poll, which was conducted by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times. “They don’t really know much about the candidates.”

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Among those who had a preference, former Democratic Rep. Katie Porter of Irvine had a small edge as the top choice, with the backing of 17%. Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican, was the only other candidate who received double-digit support, winning the backing of 10% of respondents.

DiCamillo said Porter’s unsuccessful 2024 U.S. Senate campaign boosted her recognition among California voters, but cautioned that she had a small, early lead more than nine months before the June 2 primary. Bianco’s support was driven by voters focused on crime and public safety, taxes and the budget deficit, perennial concerns among GOP voters, according to the survey.

Other top candidates for governor — former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former state legislative leader Toni Atkins, current California Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, former state Controller Betty Yee, wealthy businessman Stephen Cloobeck and conservative commentator Steve Hilton — received single-digit support as voters’ first choice in the poll. A few potential candidates also had single-digit support, including billionaire Los Angeles businessman Rick Caruso, former Trump administration official Ric Grenell and former GOP state Sen. Brian Dahle.

The survey is among the first independent public polls since Harris announced in late July that she would not run for governor in 2026, dramatically reshuffling the calculus in a crowded race that the former vice president was widely expected to dominate if she mounted a campaign. The poll also took place after Lt. Gov Eleni Kounalakis dropped out of the contest this month to run for state treasurer instead.

“It’s pretty wide-open,” DiCamillo said. “And when you look at the second-choice preference, first and second together, it’s bunched together.”

When voters were asked to rank their top two choices, Porter received 22% as the first or second choice, Becerra got 18%, Bianco notched 15% and Hilton won 12%, according to the poll.

None of the politicians running are well known by Californians compared with the state’s last three governors: Newsom, the former mayor of San Francisco and lieutenant governor, who during his two terms as governor has positioned himself as a foil to President Trump ; former two-term Gov. Jerry Brown, who along with his father left an indelible imprimatur on California’s history; and former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a global celebrity who returned to the Hollywood limelight after he left office, along with launching efforts to fight climate change and support independent redistricting nationwide.

A pressing question is whether anyone else enters the race, notably Caruso, who has the ability to self-fund a campaign. The deadline to file to run for the seat is March 6.

Whoever is elected as California’s next governor will face the difficult task of contending with a hostile Trump administration and an electorate looking to the state’s next leader to address its most pressing concerns.

Economic issues are top of mind among all registered voters, with 36% saying the cost of living is their greatest concern and 25% focusing on the affordability of housing, according to the poll. But there were sharp partisan disparities about other issues. Democrats were more concerned about the state of democracy, climate change and healthcare, while Republicans prioritized crime, taxes and immigration.

Two of California’s most prominent Democrats, Newsom and Harris, are longtime friends grounded in their Bay Area roots and both viewed as potential 2028 presidential candidates.

As a potential White House hopeful, Newsom has an edge over Harris among Californians overall as well as the state’s Democrats, according to the poll.

Roughly 45% of the state’s registered voters said they were very or somewhat enthusiastic about Newsom running, compared with 36% who expressed a similar sentiment about Harris. Additionally, nearly two-thirds of registered voters and 51% of Democrats said Harris should not run for president again after two unsuccessful White House bids — in the primary in 2020 and in the general election in 2024.

“She lost, which is always a negative when you’re trying to run again,” DiCamillo said. “It’s interesting that even after Harris bowed out of the governor’s race, most Californians don’t really think she should run for president.”

While he described Newsom’s support as a “mixed bag” among the state’s registered voters, DiCamillo pointed to his strength among Democrats. Nearly 7 of 10 registered Democratic voters in the state said they are very or somewhat enthusiastic about Newsom running for president, compared with 54% who expressed similar feelings about Harris.

The poll took place during a tumultuous period as Trump’s far-right policies begin to hit their stride.

Drastic cuts to healthcare, nutrition, reproductive rights and other federal safety-net programs are expected to disproportionately affect Californians. The Trump administration‘s aggressive immigration raids in Los Angeles and across the state and country have caused the nation’s partisan divide to widen, driven by the president’s decision to deploy the military and target all undocumented immigrants, including law-abiding workers. Higher-education institutions across the nation have been targeted by the Trump administration, including UCLA, which is being threatened with a $1-billion fine.

Californians were surveyed shortly before Democratic state lawmakers, trying to fight the Trump administration’s agenda, voted Thursday to call a special election in November to redraw the state’s congressional districts. The action was taken to counter gerrymandering efforts in Texas and other GOP-led states as both parties fight for control of Congress in next year’s midterm elections.

The Berkeley IGS poll surveyed 4,950 California registered voters online in English and Spanish from Aug. 11 to 17. The results are estimated to have a margin of error of 2 percentage points in either direction in the overall sample, and larger numbers for subgroups.

The field of candidates for California governor expanded rapidly this year as a growing number of politicians entered the race to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, but now it’s starting to shrink.

Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, a major Democratic donor and the first well-known candidate to formally launch a campaign for governor in April 2023, said Friday morning that she is dropping out of the governor’s race and will instead run for state treasurer.

Her announcement is the second big development in the governor’s race in the last two weeks. Last Wednesday, former Vice President Kamala Harris said she would not run, creating a vacuum other Democrats in the race are rushing to fill.

Kounalakis said in a statement that as treasurer, she can “make the greatest impact by focusing on California’s financial future.”

The state treasurer manages California’s assets and serves on powerful boards that oversee the state employee pension systems and award financing for affordable housing and infrastructure projects. That role, Kounalakis said, would allow her to focus on “fiscal responsibility, economic opportunity and strategic investment in our state’s priorities — from affordable housing and clean energy to infrastructure and education.”

“This work is critical and I am prepared for the challenge,” Kounalakis said.

Kounalakis is the former U.S. Ambassador to Hungary and the daughter of a wealthy real estate developer from Sacramento. In 2016, Kounalakis was a California co-chair of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, helping raise money and advising on foreign policy.

Her family has deep ties to the well-heeled world of Bay Area political donors and power brokers, including U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) who gave Kounalakis a nod on TV last week after Harris decided not to run for governor.

Her exit from the governor’s race creates an opening for other candidates to build relationships and secure contributions from those donors, some of whom were waiting to give until Harris made a decision.

The other Democrats in the race include Toni Atkins, a former Assembly speaker and Senate president pro tem; Xavier Becerra, former California attorney general and Biden Cabinet secretary; Stephen Cloobeck, a philanthropist and businessman; Katie Porter, a former congresswoman from Orange County; Tony Thurmond, the superintendent of public instruction; Antonio Villaraigosa, the former mayor of Los Angeles; and Betty Yee, the former state controller.

There are two prominent Republicans running: former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco.

Early polling showed Kounalakis in the top half of the gubernatorial field, but most voters also said they haven’t made a decision yet and don’t know the candidates.

Kounalakis had raised millions of dollars in her race for governor, most of which her campaign said she will be able to transfer to her race for treasurer.

She will face several other longtime California politicians in that race, including state Sen. Anna Caballero (D-Salinas); the former mayor of Oakland, Libby Schaaf; and Tony Vazquez, a member of the state Board of Equalization.

Kounalakis was first elected lieutenant governor in 2018 and was reelected in 2022. The office is a largely ceremonial post that has been a launchpad for the governor’s mansion in the past: Both Newsom and former Gov. Gray Davis previously served as lieutenant governor.

Many voters are undecided in California’s 2026 governor’s race as well as about Democratic efforts to redraw the state’s congressional districts in an effort to counter GOP efforts in other states, according to a new poll released Friday.

In the first public poll since former Vice President Kamala Harris opted to not run for governor, former Democratic Rep. Katie Porter had the support of 18% of registered voters in California, while Republican commentator Steve Hilton had the backing of 12%, according to the Emerson College poll. No other candidate in the sprawling field had double-digit support, and 38% of voters said they were undecided.

The primary will take place June 2. The candidates have yet to start aggressively advertising or reaching out to voters, so these numbers could fluctuate wildly over the next 10 months.

When asked about a special election that could occur in November, voters were split over a proposed Democratic effort to redraw congressional districts. One-third of voters support the effort, a quarter oppose it and 42% were unsure, according to the poll.

Redistricting typically occurs after the once-a-decade census, but California is considering a middecade redrawing of congressional boundaries to counter potential moves by Texas and other GOP states to boost the number of Republicans in the House and keep the GOP in control of Congress.

California state lawmakers are expected to vote on calling a special election about the matter after they return from summer recess Aug. 18.

The poll of 1,000 California voters took place on August 4 and 5, and has 3% margin of error in either direction.

Wealthy first-time political candidate Stephen J. Cloobeck is spending $1.4 million on television ads starting Tuesday — the first barrage of cable and broadcast messaging that Californians will likely be bombarded with in next year’s governor’s election.

Cloobeck’s campaign declined to preview the 30-second ad on Monday, but the candidate confirmed the size of the ad buy. Public records of advertising purchases show that Cloobeck bought space in every California market on cable, as well as broadcast television time in Sacramento. He also bought time in New York City and Washington, D.C. — as well as West Palm Beach, the location of President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago.

Cloobeck confirmed the size of the buy; a campaign advisor confirmed that they would run through Monday and that he was also launching a social-media effort.

“I will always Fight for California. All Californians deserve the contract to be fulfilled for an affordable livable workable state,” Cloobeck said in a text message. “Watch [the ad] and you will see how a conservative Democrat fights for All Californians.”

The move comes after former Vice President Kamala Harris opted last week against running for governor, leaving a race without a clear front-runner with a large field that is widely unknown to most California voters.

The candidates need to raise their name recognition among California’s 22.9 million registered voters, which makes Cloobeck’s early advertising understandable, according to Democratic strategists.

“It’s unprecedented for regular business. Not for this race,” said Democratic media buyer Sheri Sadler, who is not currently affiliated with a candidate in the contest.

It’s also not unprecedented for Cloobeck, a Beverly Hills philanthropist and businessman. He announced his gubernatorial run in November with a fusillade of television and digital ads.

While the 63-year-old’s exact net worth is unclear, he made his fortune in real estate and hospitality. He founded Diamond Resorts International, a timeshare and vacation property company, which he sold in 2016. Earlier, he appeared on several episodes of the reality-television show “Undercover Boss,” which sends executives in disguise into low-level jobs at their businesses.

While Cloobeck has not run for office before, he has long been a prodigious Democratic donor and fundraiser. He also played a critical role in renaming the airport in Las Vegas after the late Sen. Harry Reid, whom he describes as a father figure. The bookshelves at his sprawling Beverly Hills mansion are lined with pictures of himself with Democratic presidents and many other prominent members of the party.

Cloobeck announced last week that he was contributing $10 million to his campaign, on top of the $3 million he initially seeded it with. His wealth was on vivid display at the California Democratic Party‘s spring convention, where canvassers who said they were paid $25 per hour wore royal blue shirts emblazoned with his name chanted his name. Cloobeck said at the time that his campaign had spent “probably a couple hundred thousand dollars” on the effort.

For months, candidates in the race to become California’s next governor had waited for a pivotal question to be settled: Will former Vice President Kamala Harris run or not?

With Harris’ announcement this week that she’s out, a new question arose: Who’s the front-runner now?

Because of Harris’ star power, the answer is far from simple. For months, other candidates saw their campaign planning and fundraising undercut by the possibility she would run, meaning the race got a big reset seconds after Harris made her announcement Wednesday.

Some political observers give the nod to former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter, who appears to have a small leg up over her opponents.

Porter was the only Democrat to receive double-digit support in multiple polls when Harris was not included in the field.

A prodigious fundraiser while she was in Congress representing an Orange County district, Porter reported a strong infusion of cash in the months after launching her campaign in March, and said she raised $250,000 in the 36 hours after Harris’ announcement.

Katie Porter, a lawyer who served as a U.S. representative from California from 2019 to 2025, speaks at the Women’s Caucus at the California Democratic Party Convention at the Anaheim Hilton and Convention Center in May.

(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)

“The enthusiasm we’re seeing from donors at every level shows that Californians know how critical this race is,” Porter said in an email blast.

Other candidates — including Xavier Becerra, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Biden administration and a former California attorney general — have also tried to assert that, with Harris out, they are moving up.

“BECERRA CAMPAIGN BUILDING MOMENTUM IN ‘WIDE OPEN’ RACE,” read the subject line of an email sent Friday by the Becerra campaign, saying he is “well-positioned to unite a broad swath of voters around his plans to make health care and housing less expensive and more accessible.”

Xavier Becerra, attorney and former United States secretary of Health and Human Services, speaks at the labor caucus at the California Democratic Party Convention at the Anaheim Hilton and Convention Center in May.

(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)

Outside observers, however, said that none of the candidates really stand out from the pack at the moment.

“That these remaining candidates are jockeying for bragging rights about who may be the front-runner — it’s to be expected, but it’s ludicrous,” said Garry South, a veteran Democratic strategist who has worked on a number of past gubernatorial campaigns, including for former Gov. Gray Davis.

“With Harris opting out, there will likely be no obvious front-runner among the remainder of the current field for quite some time,” South said. “None of these candidates start out with statewide name recognition.”

With such a wide-open field, factors such as endorsements and communication strategies will be important to watch, experts said. So will the candidates’ ability to raise money and use it to broaden their appeal.

“I would start spending money on social media, on television advertising, on every single platform I could find to build up my name ID,” South said, but “none of them have enough money to do that at the moment.”

Experience and endorsements

With Harris out, will she back someone else?

“Obviously if she did endorse, that would be a big plus” for whichever candidate she rallied behind, said John Pitney, a professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College.

Harris has long relationships with several of the candidates in the race. A source familiar with her thinking told The Times after Harris bowed out that she was still considering whether and how to approach the governor’s race.

Other endorsements could affect the race as well. Hours after Harris announced her decision, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), the influential former House Speaker, appeared on CNN to endorse Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, whom she has known for years.

“We have many great candidates, one in particular Eleni Tsakopoulos, whom I support,” Pelosi said, referring to Kounalakis by her maiden name.

Eleni Kounalakis, lieutenant governor of California, speaks at the Women’s Caucus at the California Democratic Party Convention at the Anaheim Hilton and Convention Center in May.

(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)

Kounalakis’ father, the wealthy developer Angelo Tsakopoulos, helped bankroll an independent expenditure committee supporting his daughter’s 2018 campaign for lieutenant governor. Political observers are watching to see if he dumps money into a similar effort backing her gubernatorial campaign.

Pitney said Pelosi’s opinion “would carry a lot more weight” if she were still speaker. He said it “isn’t necessarily going to sway a large chunk of the electorate,” but could be important if it sways Bay Area donors.

A former GOP legislative aide and national party staffer who renounced his membership in the Republican Party the night Trump was elected in 2016, Pitney said that endorsements are far from a determining factor in today’s political landscape.

“I hesitate to rule anybody out, because very often candidates seem to come out of nowhere — like Mamdani in New York City,” he said, referring to the sudden rise and stunning upset primary win of 33-year-old democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani in the New York mayoral race.

Pitney added that experience in government and administrative leadership also matters, but could also cut against candidates at a time when many voters are frustrated and want something new.

Antonio Villaraigosa speaks to the Latino Caucus at the Calififornia Democratic Convention at the Anaheim Convention Center in May..

(Carlin Stiehl/Los Angeles Times)

For example, Antonio Villaraigosa, the former state Assembly speaker and L.A. mayor who is in his 70s, “obviously has a long history, but that long history is both an advantage and a disadvantage,” Pitney said.

Villaraigosa has said his campaign is “about the future.” But voters “may not regard him as a fresh face,” Pitney said.

Name recognition and money

None of the current candidates for governor have the same profile as Harris. In fact, they are broadly unknown to huge swaths of the electorate.

That means they have their work cut out for them, Pitney and South said — namely in terms of fundraising.

South said that there “is no question that the Democratic donor base has basically been sitting on their haunches waiting to see what Harris is going to do.”

But, he said, he hasn’t seen any sign yet that donors have picked a favorite candidate now that she’s out, either — which is a problem for candidates with little or no name recognition.

“None of these candidates in the remaining field with Harris out have enough money in the bank to run a statewide campaign for governor,” he said.

South said that could change if Kounalakis gets another major infusion of cash from her father and once again taps her personal wealth.

At the same time, there could also be a “huge blowback” from that sort of splashy family spending, South said, especially if Kounalakis’ opponents pounced on it as distasteful.

“We have not tended in this state to elect moneyed people who try to buy the governor’s race,” he said.

South said he is watching to see if big Bay Area donors decide to back Porter “because of her profile as a progressive.”

Los Angeles developer and 2022 mayoral candidate Rick Caruso “could be a force” if he were to enter the race, Pitney said, because “he has prominence in Southern California and also has a lot of money.”

Fundraising reports

The most recent fundraising reports, which were due Thursday night, shine a light on candidates’ coffers — but only through the end of June, well before Harris dropped out.

The Democrats who do not have the potential to self-fund their campaigns reported having millions of dollars in cash on hand as of June 30, including some who transferred money from prior campaign committees to their gubernatorial accounts.

Former legislative leader Toni Atkins reported having $4.3 million in the campaign, while raising $648,000 and spending $549,000 in the first six months of this year.

Gubernatorial candidate Toni Atkins speaks to supporters at the California Democratic Convention at the Anaheim Convention Center in May.

(Carlin Stiehl/Los Angeles Times)

Villaraigosa raised $1.1 million and spent $550,000 this year, but reported $3.3 million cash on hand based on fundraising he did last year.

Becerra had $2.1 million in the bank after raising $2.5 million and spending $449,000 in the first six months of the year.

Porter reported raising $2.5 million and spending $449,000 since launching her campaign in March. She said she has $2.1 million in the bank.

Unlike the other candidates, Porter’s campaign revealed her fundraising because her filing on the state disclosure website didn’t show any dollar figures.

Spokesman Nathan Click said her number of small-dollar donors crashed the state’s system, and that they had been working with state officials to get the documents displayed on the secretary of state’s website all day Friday. He said most of Porter’s 34,000 donors contributed less than $200 each.

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco reported raising $1.6 million and spending $609,000 this year, leaving him with $1 million in the bank.

A few candidates reported mediocre fundraising numbers, but have personal wealth they can draw on.

Kounalakis raised just over $100,000 and spent nearly three times as much during the first half of this year. She has more than $4.6 million on hand and millions more in her lieutenant governor campaign account, although some of that money can’t be transferred because of campaign finance rules.

Businessman Stephen J. Cloobeck, a Los Angeles Democrat, raised about $160,000 and spent $1.5 million — including more than $1 million on consultants. He had about $729,000 on hand at the end of the period. He also said he made a $10-million contribution Friday that he said “turbocharged” his campaign.

Philanthropist and businessman Stephen Cloobeck, right, takes a photo with a supporter after speaking about his candidacy for California governor during the labor caucus at the California Democratic Party Convention at the Anaheim Hilton and Convention Center in May.

(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)

“One of my many advantages is that I’m not a politician and I am not compromised,” Cloobeck said.

Former Fox News host Steve Hilton, a Republican candidate, raised about $1.5 million, of which $200,000 was a personal loan. Hilton spent about $1 million and has a little less than $800,000 in the bank.

At the lowest end of the fundraising were former state controller Betty Yee, who raised almost $238,000 and spent $255,000, with $637,000 on hand; and state schools superintendent Tony Thurmond, who raised about $70,000, spent about $180,000 and had almost $560,000 on hand.

Both Yee and Thurmond told The Times last month that fundraising had slowed while Democratic donors waited on Harris to make a decision.

The Democrats running for California governor have spent the spring and summer working to win over the powerful donors and interest groups who could help them squeak through a competitive primary election.

But the candidates, and many deep-pocketed Democrats, are still waiting for the decision that will have the biggest impact on the race: whether former Vice President Kamala Harris is running.

Since Harris lost to President Trump in November, the race to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom has been in suspended animation, with candidates trying to plan their campaigns without knowing who their biggest opponents will be. A few are making contingency plans to run for other offices. And some major donors are waiting to write big checks.

“It creates a little bit of a limbo situation,” said Tony Thurmond, the state superintendent of public instruction who launched his gubernatorial campaign in 2023.

The Democrats in the race are talking to many of the same potential donors, Thurmond said, and most have the same question: “Is she going to run?” The only answer, Thurmond said, is an unsatisfying one: “We don’t know.”

Since leaving Washington in January, Harris has mostly stayed out of the public eye, settling back into her Brentwood home with her husband, Doug Emhoff, and talking to close friends and confidantes about what she should do next. She is weighing whether to leave politics, run for governor or run for president for a third time. She is expected to make a decision about the gubernatorial race by the end of summer.

The Democrats who are already running for governor lack Harris’ star power, and her entry could upend the race. But the former vice president would also face questions about her 107-day sprint to the White House, what she knew about President Biden’s decline and whether someone who has run unsuccessfully for president twice really wants to be California’s governor.

“She is looking closely where is the best place to put her energy and focus and her time,” said Debbie Mesloh, a longtime Harris ally.

The few public appearances Harris has made this year — meeting with firefighters in Altadena, attending a high school graduation in Compton and headlining a Democratic National Committee fundraiser in the Bay Area — have been fodder for those trying to read the tea leaves. What does it mean that Harris skipped the state Democratic Party convention? That Emhoff has taken a teaching job at USC?

Harris had originally planned to take a two-week vacation at the end of this month but has canceled her trip, according to someone familiar with her plans.

Harris has also been in New York, where she attended Broadway plays and the exclusive Met Gala; in San Francisco, where she dined with her niece Meena at the high-end Japanese restaurant Shoji; and in Los Angeles, where she has shopped for groceries at a 99 Ranch Market in Westwood and the Brentwood Farmers Market.

As the months have worn on, some gubernatorial campaigns have started to think that Harris’ victory feels like less of a foregone conclusion than if she’d announced in January after leaving office.

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former Biden Cabinet secretary Xavier Becerra and former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter of Irvine have said that they will stay in the race no matter what.

Veteran state Senate leader Toni Atkins of San Diego said she is also staying in if Harris runs, saying in a statement that “while the vice president has her own path, our campaign is moving full speed ahead.”

Former state Controller Betty Yee said in an interview this week that even if Harris runs, she is staying in, too.

“No, no, no,” Yee said, of the possibility of seeking another statewide office. Being governor, she said, “is what I feel like I’ve prepared to do. I will be staying in the race and really leaning into my fiscal and financial background.”

Yee said when she talks to donors, they want to know two things: how California can push back against the Trump administration, and what she will do if Harris enters the race.

Dan Newman, a political strategist who’s worked for Newsom, Harris and several of the gubernatorial candidates, said that the race is at an odd inflection point, with candidates who “don’t know who their potential voters are, because they don’t know who they’re running against,” and some donors who are waiting — at least for now — to write big checks.

“They’ve got a good excuse to not give, because even if they are a big fan of a candidate who’s in the race now, they don’t know if the candidate will stay in the race,” Newman said. “Then there are others who don’t want to give to someone who might run against her.”

Eric Jaye, a political strategist who previously worked for Villaraigosa’s 2018 gubernatorial campaign and advised Newsom when he was mayor of San Francisco, said he’s hearing “frustration” from donors who are ready to see the race pick up speed.

“They’re not going to wait much longer,” Jaye said. “There are going to be donors who say, ‘We have to go. We’re not going to wait for you.’”

But even if Harris entered, that wouldn’t be a guarantee that donors would back her again, including those who are angry that she spent nearly $1.5 billion in campaign funds in her compressed campaign for the White House in 2024.

“The money is very, very upset with her,” said gubernatorial candidate Stephen Cloobeck, a businessman and Democratic donor who is running for California governor. “They’re my friends. I’m part of that money. Everyone is thoroughly reeling.”

The amount of money that candidates raise is one way to gauge their support — and prospects. That picture remains a little fuzzy, though, since gubernatorial candidates have until July 31 to report their fundraising hauls from the first half of the year.

The only candidate to release numbers so far is Becerra, who said he raised $2.4 million since entering the race in early April, including a $1.1-million transfer from his congressional campaign account. Becerra’s campaign has $2 million on hand, including the largest contributions allowed by law — $39,200 — from the politically connected Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and Pechanga Band of Indians.

Campaigns are required to report contributions of $5,000 or more shortly after they receive them. Those figures don’t represent total fundraising, but can still show a campaign’s trajectory.

Three of the eight candidates have raised less than $100,000 this year in chunks of more than $5,000 at a time, state data show. Yee reported $71,900 and Thurmond, $32,500.

Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis reported raising $70,000, including $5,000 from Google. Her campaign said Kounalakis, who has been raising money since entering the race in April 2023, has $9 million on hand.

“I want to be clear that I’m in this race to win,” Kounalakis said.

Villaraigosa, who entered the race last summer, has raised almost $1 million this year through large donations, data show. Atkins reported about $381,000 this year, and Cloobeck, about $132,000.

Porter, who entered the race in March, reported almost $475,000 in larger contributions, according to state data. She also transferred $942,000 from her U.S. Senate account to her gubernatorial account, according to federal filings made public Tuesday.

Former Vice President Kamala hasn’t decided whether she will run for California governor next year, but a new poll released Wednesday shows that she would be a favorite of voters if she does.

Though many voters were undecided, Harris was the choice of 41% of survey respondents, compared to 29% who opted for an unnamed Republican candidate, according to a poll by the University of California Irvine. She also had the greatest favorability ratings and is most well known compared to all of the candidates who have announced.

“The path to governor seems well-paved for Vice President Harris if she decides to run,” said Jon Gould, dean of UCI’s School of Social Ecology, in a statement. “Although she lacks majority support at the moment, people know her better than the other candidates and generally view her favorably.”

Only 5% of Californians had never heard of Harris, while every other announced candidate was unknown by a far larger number of respondents, including those who had run for statewide office previously. Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who ran for governor in 2018, was unknown by 47% of survey respondents; 48% were unfamiliar with former Rep. Katie Porter of Irvine, who ran for U.S. Senate in 2024.

When tested against candidates who have announced, Harris was the choice of 24% of voters, the only candidate to crack double digits, according to the poll. However, 40% of respondents were undecided, according to the poll.

Among Democrats, who account for 47% of the state’s voters as of February, Harris had the support of nearly half, while every announced candidate had single-digit support. Harris led among Californians in every region and in every racial group, according to the poll.

Billionaire real estate developer Rick Caruso, a Democrat who unsuccessfully ran for mayor of Los Angeles in 2022 and is reportedly debating whether to run for mayor again or governor, was the favored choice of GOP voters, with the backing of 27% of survey respondents.

Harris, whose representatives did not respond to a request for comment, is expected to decide whether she enters the race by the end of the summer, a delay that has prompted criticism from several candidates in the crowded field of candidates who have already announced their bids.

The statewide poll of 4,143 Californians was conducted online in two separate polls, one between May 27 and June 2, and another between May 29 and June 4. The margin of error in either direction varies between 2.9% and 3.6%, according to UCI.

ORLANDO, Fla. — Florida’s child welfare agency sent a letter to a Florida newspaper telling it to “cease and desist” its reporting on foster families for a story about a nonprofit associated with Gov. Ron DeSantis’ wife that is the subject of an investigation.

The Orlando Sentinel received the letter on Friday from the state Department of Children and Families, whose top official is appointed by the governor. The letter claimed that the newspaper’s Tallahassee reporter had used threats to coerce foster families into making negative statements about the Hope Florida Foundation when he contacted them about the welfare nonprofit behind the signature initiative of Casey DeSantis, Florida’s first lady.

“Cease and desist the above-described intimidation of these families,” the DCF letter said.

Orlando Sentinel Executive Editor Roger Simmons said the agency’s characterization of the reporter’s conduct was “completely false.” The yet-to-be-published story was looking into grants distributed by Hope Florida to organizations, families and individuals, according to the Sentinel.

“We stand by our stories and reject the state’s attempt to chill free speech and encroach on our First Amendment right to report on an important issue,” Simmons said in an email.

DCF on Monday didn’t provide an immediate response to an inquiry about the letter. DCF posted the cease-and-desist letter on social media Friday, saying Hope Florida had supported foster families with donations to repair their homes following last year’s hurricanes.

The letter is attempting to intimidate the Sentinel from publishing what may be unflattering news about Hope Florida in what is known as prior restraint, and prior restraint efforts typically are unconstitutional, said Clay Calvert, a law professor emeritus at the University of Florida and nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

If he were the Sentinel’s attorney, Calvert said, he would tell the agency “to go pound sand.”

“DCF can send all the cease and desist letters it wants, but the Sentinel isn’t obligated to follow any of them,” he said. “This is really trying to silence any negative coverage before it comes out.”

Prosecutors in Tallahassee have opened an investigation related to the Hope Florida Foundation. A public records custodian in the office of Second Judicial Circuit State Attorney Jack Campbell confirmed the existence of “an open, on-going investigation” last month in response to a records request from The Associated Press. The investigation was first reported by the Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times.

Republican state lawmakers in DeSantis’ own party have been scrutinizing Hope Florida and its nonprofit foundation, which gave $10 million from a state Medicaid settlement to two nonprofits. Those groups in turn gave millions to a political committee, chaired by DeSantis’ then-chief of staff, that campaigned against a failed referendum on recreational marijuana.

In April, Republican state Rep. Alex Andrade wrapped up the investigation he had been spearheading into Hope Florida, saying he would leave the rest of the inquiry to “the FBI and Department of Justice,” though there is no public evidence that either is doing so. Andrade has alleged that the flow of funds from the foundation to the nonprofits and on to the political committees amounts to “conspiracy to commit money laundering and wire fraud.”

The governor has dismissed the investigation of Hope Florida as a politically motivated smear against his wife, whom he’s floated as his potential successor when he terms out in 2026.

Schneider writes for the Associated Press.

It’s unlikely two consecutive California governors have ever shared the multigenerational family connection that links Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom to his predecessor, Gov. Jerry Brown. But beware those looking for something deep: Any ties that bind together the two Democrats do so loosely.

“It’s just not a normal political relationship,” Newsom, who will be sworn in Monday, said in an earlier interview with The Times.

Brown is a singular figure in California’s modern history, the scion of a political family whose meteoric rise in the 1970s gave way to failed efforts at the presidency and U.S. Senate before an electoral rebirth as a mayor, attorney general and governor. And it was Newsom, then a brash, young San Francisco mayor, who briefly stood in Brown’s way, launching an ambitious campaign for the 2010 governor’s race that fizzled almost a year before the election.

But the story goes back much further: Brown and Newsom are members of a political fraternity that dominated their shared hometown of San Francisco for much of the 20th century.

On crime and punishment, Gov. Jerry Brown leaves behind revised rules and a new focus on redemption »

Former Gov. Pat Brown, the current governor’s late father, was elected that city’s district attorney in 1943 after a campaign financed by three friends, including William A. Newsom II, the governor-elect’s grandfather and son of a prominent builder and bank investor.

“If they hadn’t agreed to put up $5,000 [each], I wouldn’t have been a candidate,” Pat Brown said in a 1978 interview for UC Berkeley’s oral history project.

In 1960, Brown’s administration awarded a Squaw Valley concession contract to the elder Newsom, a deal panned by a legislative analyst as the state “paying for everything and getting nothing.”

The two men’s sons grew up alongside each other. William A. Newsom III, the governor-elect’s father, who died last month, was a few years older than Jerry Brown. Both graduated from San Francisco’s St. Ignatius High School and Bill Newsom once briefly dated Brown’s sister, the governor told the crowd at her eulogy in 2015.

During his first term as governor in 1975, Brown appointed Bill Newsom to the Superior Court in Placer County and then to a state appeals court. The governor-elect’s father once recounted how his interest in environmental law and preserving Lake Tahoe had intrigued Brown.

“I went up a couple of times when Gavin was a little boy, and we met with Jerry and talked about things at the lake,” Bill Newsom said in his own oral history interview with UC Berkeley in 2009.

Decades later, the young Newsom and an older Brown ended up on a political collision course. In 2011, frustrated with Brown’s slow pace for appointing members of an economic commission he chaired as lieutenant governor, Newsom drafted his own statewide proposal. Brown, deep into an effort to erase a $27-billion budget deficit, didn’t look kindly on the effort and grabbed the issue for himself by appointing a statewide jobs czar.

“Looking back, I wish I had a do-over,” Newsom told The Times last spring. “He’s dealing with triage and solvency. I would approach it differently.”

In the years since, Newsom has praised Brown’s fiscal philosophy for teaching that “you do not have to be profligate to be progressive,” a mantra to be tested once hundreds of bills — with spending projections sure to run into the billions of dollars — are sent to his desk by the Legislature.

But on Monday, it will be Newsom’s call on what to do, though few expect Brown — now with plenty of time to offer advice — to disappear altogether.

At a campaign event last fall, already preparing to move to his Northern California ranch, he had a simple message for his successor: “I’m only an hour from Sacramento,” he said. “So, Gavin, do not screw up.”

[email protected]

Follow @johnmyers on Twitter, sign up for our daily Essential Politics newsletter and listen to the weekly California Politics Podcast

June 5 (UPI) — Former Republican-turned Democrat Rep. David Jolly, D-Florida, has announced his intentions to enter the 2026 race for governor in a state largely dominated by GOP politics.

Jolly acknowledged his political disadvantage running for office in a state where Republicans maintain a fundraising advantage and statistically outnumber registered Democrats, but said he would try to win the support of nonpartisan voters who have been turned off by the highly fractious political climate.

“I’m for lower corporate taxes because I think it leads to greater economic growth,” Jolly said on his campaign website. “But I’m more for gun safety legislation because I think that reduces violence in our state.”

Jolly, who has been an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump and a centrist Republican, said his disagreements with the president were at least partly responsible for his decision to change parties.

Jolly posted on social media that Florida is in a crisis not just of policy, not “right versus left, but right versus wrong.”

Jolly has said he will focus on affordable housing, support a property tax cut, use the state’s tourist and development tax to create housing for the workforce and offer communities more block grants for housing.

He has also proposed restructuring Florida’s catastrophe insurance, replacing private insurance with state dollars in an effort to more effectively help residents who lose property during natural disasters. He said his plan could reduce homeowners insurance costs by as much as 60%.

Jolly flirted with a run for the U.S. Senate in 2016 but abandoned his efforts after Marco Rubio, now the U.S. Secretary of State who was eventually elected to the Senate from Florida, entered the race.

Jolly is the first Democrat to enter the 2026 gubernatorial race. He represented Pinellas County as a Republican in Congress from 2014-2017.

As California positions itself as a leader on climate change, former Los Angeles mayor and gubernatorial candidate Antonio Villaraigosa is pivoting away from his own track record as an environmental champion to defend the state’s struggling oil industry.

Villaraigosa’s work to expand mass transit, plant trees and reduce carbon emissions made him a favorite of the environmental movement, but the former state Assembly speaker also accepted more than $1 million in campaign contributions and other financial support from oil companies and other donors tied to the industry over more than three decades in public life, according to city and state fundraising disclosures reviewed by The Times.

Since entering the race last year to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, Villaraigosa has accepted more than $176,000 from donors with ties to the oil industry, including from a company that operates oil fields in the San Joaquin Valley and in Los Angeles County, the disclosures show.

The clash between Villaraigosa’s environmentalist credentials and oil-industry ties surfaced in the governor’s race after Valero announced in late April that its Bay Area refinery would close next year, not long after Phillips 66 said its Wilmington refinery would close in 2025.

Villaraigosa is now warning that California drivers could see gas prices soar, blasting as “absurd” policies that he said could have led to the refinery closures.

“I’m not fighting for refineries,” Villaraigosa said in an interview. “I’m fighting for the people who pay for gas in this state.”

The refineries are a sore spot for Newsom and for California Democrats, pitting their environmental goals against concerns about the rising cost of living and two of the state’s most powerful interest groups — organized labor and environmentalists — against each other.

Villaraigosa said Democrats are letting the perfect be the enemy of the good in their approach to fighting climate change.

He said he hoped no more refineries would close until the state hits more electrification milestones, including building more transmission lines, green-energy storage systems and charging stations for electric cars. The only way for the state to reach “net zero” emissions, he said, is an “all-of-the-above” approach that includes solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, nuclear power and oil and gas.

“The notion that we’re not going to do that is poppycock,” Villaraigosa said.

Villaraigosa’s vocal support for the oil industry has upset some environmental groups that saw him as a longtime ally.

“I’m honestly shocked at just how bad it is,” said RL Miller, the president of Climate Hawks Vote and the chair of the California Democratic Party’s environmental caucus, of the contributions Villaraigosa has accepted since entering the race in July.

Miller said Villaraigosa signed a pledge during his unsuccessful run for governor in 2018 not to accept campaign contributions from oil companies and “named executives” at fossil-fuel entities. She said he took the pledge shortly after accepting the maximum allowable contributions from several oil donors in 2017.

Miller said that more than $100,000 in donations that Villaraigosa has accepted in this gubernatorial cycle were clear violations of the pledge.

That included contributions from the state’s largest oil and gas producer, California Resources Corp. and its subsidiaries, as well as the founder of Rocky Mountain Resources, a leader of the oil company Berry Corp., and Excalibur Well Services.

“This is bear-hugging the oil industry,” she said.

Environmental activists view the pledge as binding for future campaigns. Villaraigosa said he has not signed it for this campaign.

The economy is dramatically different than it was in 2018, Villaraigosa said, and working-class Americans are being hammered, which he said was a major factor in recent Democratic losses.

“We’re losing working people, particularly working people who don’t have a college education,” he said. “Why are we losing them? The cost of living, the cost of gas, the cost of utilities, the cost of groceries.”

Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego, said such statements are consistent with Villaraigosa’s messaging in recent years.

“Villaraigosa is squarely in the moderate lane in the governor’s race. That doomed him in 2018, when voters wanted to counterbalance President Trump and Villaraigosa was outflanked by Newsom,” Kousser said. “But today, even some Democrats may want to counterbalance the direction that they see Sacramento taking, especially when it comes to cost-of-living issues and the price of gas.”

He added that the fossil-fuel donations may not be the basis for Villaraigosa’s apparent embrace of oil and gas priorities.

“When a politician takes campaign contributions from an industry and also takes positions that favor it, that raises the possibility of corruption, of money influencing votes,” Kousser said. “But it is also possible that it was the politician’s own approach to an issue that attracted the contributions, that their votes attracted money but were not in any way corrupted by it. That may be the case here, where Villaraigosa has held fairly consistent positions on this issue and consistently attracted support from an industry because of those positions.”

Other Democrats in the 2026 governor’s race, including Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter, former state Controller Betty Yee and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, have signed the pledge not to accept contributions from oil industry interests, Miller said.

Former California Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins, former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and businessman Stephen Cloobeck have not. (Cloobeck has never run for office before and has not been asked to sign.)

Other gubernatorial candidates have also accepted fossil-fuel contributions, although in smaller numbers than Villaraigosa, state and federal filings show.

Becerra accepted contributions from Chevron and California Resources Corp., formerly Occidental Petroleum, while running for attorney general. Atkins took donations from Chevron, Occidental and a trade group for oil companies while running for state Assembly and state Senate. And while running for lieutenant governor, Kounalakis took contributions from executives at oil and mining companies.

Campaign representatives for the two main Republican candidates in the race, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and conservative commentator Steve Hilton, said they welcomed oil-industry donations.

Villaraigosa is a fierce defender of his environmental record dating back to his first years as an elected official in the California Assembly.

As mayor of Los Angeles from 2005 to 2013, Villaraigosa set new goals to reduce emissions at the Port of Los Angeles, end the use of coal-burning power plants and shift the city’s energy generation toward solar, wind and geothermal sources.

The child of a woman who relied on Metro buses, he also branded himself the “transportation mayor.” Villaraigosa was a vocal champion for the 2008 sales tax increase that provided the first funding for the extension of the Wilshire Boulevard subway to the Westside.

But, he said, Democrats in 2025 have to be realistic that the refinery closures and their goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions could disproportionately affect low-income residents who are already struggling to make ends meet.

Villaraigosa’s comments underscore a broader divide among Democrats about how to fight climate change without making California even more expensive, or driving out more high-paying jobs that don’t require a college education.

Lorena Gonzalez, a former state lawmaker who became the leader of the California Labor Federation in 2022, said that while climate change is a real threat, so is shutting down refineries.

“That’s a threat to those workers’ jobs and lives, and it’s also a threat to the price of gas,” Gonzalez said.

California is not currently positioned to end its reliance on fossil fuels, she said. If the state reduces its refining capacity, she said, it will have to rely on exports from nations that have less environmental and labor safeguards.

“Anyone running for governor has to acknowledge that,” Gonzalez said.

Villaraigosa said that while the loss of union jobs at Valero’s Bay Area refinery worried him, his primary concern was over the cost of gasoline and household budgets.

His comments come as California prepares to square off yet again against the Trump administration over its environmental policies.

The U.S. Senate on Thursday voted to revoke a federal waiver that allowed California to set its own vehicle emission standards, including a rule that would have ultimately banned the sale of new gas-fueled cars in 2035. Villaraigosa denounced the vote, but said that efforts to fight climate change can’t come at the expense of working-class Americans.

President Trump has also declared a national energy emergency, calling for increased fossil-fuel production, eliminating environmental reviews and the fast-tracking of projects in potentially sensitive ecosystems and habitats. The Trump administration is also targeting California’s environmental standards.

Villaraigosa, an Eastside native, started his career as a labor organizer and rose to speaker of the state Assembly before becoming the mayor of Los Angeles. Now 72, Villaraigosa has not held elected office for more than a decade; he finished a distant third in the 2018 gubernatorial primary.

Over the years, donors affiliated with the fossil-fuel industry have contributed more than $1 million to Villaraigosa’s political campaigns and his nonprofit causes, including an after-school program, the city’s sports and entertainment commission and an effort to reduce violence by providing programming at city parks during summer nights, according to city and state disclosures.

More than half of the contributions and support for Villaraigosa’s pet causes, over $582,000, came during his years at Los Angeles City Hall as a council member and mayor.

In 2008, billionaire oil and gas magnate T. Boone Pickens donated $150,000 to a city proposition backed by Villaraigosa that levied a new tax on phone and internet use.

Pickens made the donation as his company was vying for business at the port of Los Angeles, which is overseen by mayoral appointees and was seeking to reduce emissions by replacing diesel-powered trucks with vehicles fueled by liquid natural gas.

The rest of the contributions and other financial support flowed to Villaraigosa’s campaign accounts and affiliated committees while he served in the Assembly and during his two gubernatorial runs. These figures do not include donations to independent expenditure committees, since candidates cannot legally be involved in those efforts.

Villaraigosa said that while such voters don’t subscribe to Republicans’ “drill, baby, drill” ethos, he slammed the Democratic Party’s focus on such matters and Trump instead of kitchen-table issues.

“The cost of everything we’re doing is on the backs of the people who work the hardest and who make the least, and that’s why so many of them — even when we were saying Trump is a threat to democracy — they were saying, yeah, but what about my gas prices, grocery prices, the cost of eggs?” he said.

Times staff writer Sandra McDonald in Sacramento contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The head of the U.S. Space Force is moving ahead with plans to pull talent from Air National Guard units to help build up the still new-military service — but several governors remain opposed and argue it tramples on their rights to retain control over their state units.

Overall, the plan would affect only 578 service members across six states and the Air National Guard headquarters and augment the Space Force without creating a separate Space Force National Guard — something the service has said would not be efficient because it would be so small.

“We are actively pursuing where do we want our part-time workforce? What type of work do they do?” the head of Space Force, Gen. Chance Saltzman, said Thursday at a Politico conference.

The transferred service members would be a part-time force like they are now, just serving under the Space Force instead of their state units.

But space missions are some of the most lucrative across the military and private sectors, and the states that lose space mission service member billets are potentially losing highly valuable part-time workforce members if they have to move away to transfer to the Space Force.

Last month, the National Governors Assn. said the transfers violate their right to retain control over their state units.

“We urge that any transfers cease immediately and that there be direct and open engagement with governors,” the association said in April. The group was not immediately available to comment on Space Force’s plan.

“There’s a lot of concern in the National Guard about these individuals who are highly skilled that want to be in the Guard being transferred out,” Oklahoma Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin said at an Air Force manpower hearing this week.

Congress directed the transfers in its 2025 defense bill. But the contention between the states and the Space Force has meant the service hasn’t so far been able to approach individual members about transferring in.

According to the legislation, each National Guard will get the option to either stay with their units — and get retrained in another specialty — or join the Space Force. Those who do transfer would be allowed to remain in their home state to perform their mission for at least the next 10 years, according to the 2025 legislation.

The affected personnel include 33 from Alaska, 126 from California, 119 from Colorado, 75 from Florida, 130 from Hawaii, 69 from Ohio and 26 from Air National Guard headquarters

Copp writes for the Associated Press.