state

For the last 18 months, the city of Rancho Palos Verdes has been struggling to address a worsening local emergency — the dramatic expansion of an ancient landslide zone that has torn homes apart, buckled roadways and halted utility services.

Triggered by a succession of heavy winter rains in 2023 and 2024, the ongoing land movement has upended the lives of residents and cast the city into financial uncertainty. Without significant outside aid, officials say they expect to spend about $37 million this fiscal year on emergency landslide mitigation — a sum nearly equal to the city’s annual operating budget.

Now, to make matters worse, the Trump administration has announced that it will cease funding the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities grants — a major pot of money the city hoped to use to finance a long-term prevention and stabilization plan.

“The BRIC program was yet another example of a wasteful and ineffective FEMA program,” read the administration announcement. “It was more concerned with political agendas than helping Americans affected by natural disasters.”

For the city of Rancho Palos Verdes, the action amounts to the likely loss of $16 million for stabilization work. It also marks a striking reversal in federal support for local slide mitigation efforts.

In September 2024, a campaigning Trump visited his nearby Trump National Golf Club to say that government needed to do more to help residents in the slide area. “The mountain is moving and it could be stopped, but they need some help from the government. So, I hope they get the help,” Trump said.

Last week, city officials again extended a local emergency declaration as the crisis continues to pose unprecedented strain on city finances.

“We are running out of money quickly,” Rancho Palos Verdes Mayor Dave Bradley said at a recent City Council meeting. “We are dramatically coming to the end of our rope to be able to [continue landslide mitigation efforts]. … We are spending major percentages on our total budget on this one issue.”

The majority of those allocated funds have gone toward a collection of new underground “de-watering” wells, which pump out the groundwater that lubricates landslide slip planes — a strategy that geologists have credited with helping to ease the movement in recent months.

Millions of dollars have also gone toward repeated repairs to Palos Verdes Drive South — which continues to crack and shift — as well as efforts to fill fissures, improve drainage and maintain important infrastructure, such as sewer and power lines.

While the city isn’t yet facing a major budget shortfall, its reserve funds have quickly dwindled over the last two years. By next fiscal year — which begins in July — the city expects to have only $3.5 million in unallocated capital improvement reserves, down from $35 million three years ago, according to city data. And while landslides have been the most pressing concern of late, city officials say they now face an estimated $80 million in other capital projects.

“Without a doubt, we need outside help for this landslide,” said Ramzi Awwad, the city’s public works director. He said the city is working to find and apply for other federal and state funding sources, but has run into roadblocks because landslides are not typically included within most disaster or emergency response frameworks.

“This is a disaster … very much exacerbated by severe weather and severe climate change,” Bradley recently testified before the California Assembly Committee on Emergency Management. He called the growing price tag for necessary response “unsustainable.”

Many areas of the Rancho Palos Verdes landslide complex — which covers more than 700 acres and includes about 400 homes — are still moving as much as 1.5 feet a month, damaging property and infrastructure, according to the city. Other sections that shifted several inches a week at the peak of movement in August 2024 have slowed or completely halted. City officials attribute those improvements to the ongoing mitigation projects as well as a much drier winter — but they say more work is needed to keep the area safe and accessible.

Officials argue the loss of FEMA funding could stymie long-term slide prevention efforts that were in the works for years before land movement drastically accelerated last year.

The Portuguese Bend Landslide Remediation Project, which calls for the installation of a series of water pumps called hydraugers, as well as other measures to keep water from entering the ground, was initially awarded a $23-million FEMA BRIC grant in 2023, Awwad said. The grant was later reduced to $16 million.

The project is separate from the city’s ongoing emergency response, but key to long-term stability in the area, Awwad said.

Rancho Palos Verdes officials dispute the administration’s assertion that the BRIC grant program is “wasteful and ineffective.” Instead, they say it represented a lifeline for a small city that has long dealt with landslides.

For decades, the city’s most dramatic landslide — the Portuguese Bend slide — has moved as much as 8.5 feet a year, or approximately an inch or two per week. Last summer, it was moving about a foot a week. Other nearby landslides, including Abalone Cove and Klondike Canyon, also saw dramatic acceleration last year, but those areas are not a part of the long-term stabilization plan.

Shown is a view of a large fissure in Rancho Palos Verdes’ Portuguese Bend neighborhood. Landslides have accelerated in the city following back-to-back wet winters in 2023 and 2024.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

“Losing the BRIC funding will jeopardize the city’s ability to implement long-term efforts to slow the Portuguese Bend landslide and prevent the kind of emergency we are experiencing now from happening again,” Megan Barnes, a city spokesperson, said.

Because BRIC grants were earmarked for preventive measures, the city was unable to use the money for its emergency response. But in recent weeks, the city completed the first phase of the long-term project — planning, engineering and final designs — after FEMA approved $2.3 million for that initial work.

Officials say the city has yet to receive that portion of the funding, and it is now unclear whether it ever will.

“We are still seeking clarification on the next steps for what, if any, portion of the BRIC grant may be available,” Barnes said. “We continue to strongly urge our federal, state and county partners to recognize the urgency of this situation and continue to support the city in protecting our residents and vital infrastructure.”

Awwad said it’s not just the local residents who benefit from such stabilization efforts; it also helps the thousands of motorists who use Palos Verdes Drive South and thousands more residents who rely on the county-run sewer line that runs alongside the road.

“This is a regional issue,” Awwad said.

Barnes said the city is considering applying to FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program for the project, but securing state or federal funding for stabilization projects has been a challenge.

After the Biden administration declared the 2023-2024 winter storms a federal disaster, the city applied to FEMA for over $60 million in disaster reimbursements, linking its landslide mitigation work to the heavy rainfall. But FEMA officials rejected almost all of the city’s request.

The city has appealed that decision, but it seems unlikely federal officials will reverse course. In a recent letter to FEMA about the appeal, the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services recommended the appeal not be granted because the landslides “were unstable prior to disaster” and therefore not a “direct result of the declared disaster.”

“Cal OES agrees with [the city] that the winter storms… may have greatly accelerated the sliding,” the letter said. “However … the pre-existing instability dating back to 2018 makes that work ineligible per FEMA policy. “

The most significant outside funding the city has received has come from Los Angeles County. Supervisor Janice Hahn secured $5 million for the landslide response — more than $2 million of which has been distributed to homeowners for direct assistance through $10,000 payments. The county’s flood control district also allocated the city $2 million to help cover costs preparing for the rainy season.

In 2023, the city also received $2 million from Congress after U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) helped secure the funds for landslide remediation.

The city’s most dramatic financial support — if it comes through — would be a $42-million buyout program that was awarded last year by FEMA. With that money, city officials expect a buyout of 23 homes in the landslide zone, 15 of which have been red-tagged, or deemed unlivable. FEMA has yet to allocate those funds, Barnes said, but even if it does, none of the money would go toward slide mitigation or prevention.

In the face of such difficulties, city officials have thrown their support behind a bill that could change how the state classifies emergencies.

Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi (D-Rolling Hills Estates) introduced AB 986, which would add landslides as a condition that could constitute a state of emergency — a change that could free up a pool of state funds for Rancho Palos Verdes.

He called the bill “a common sense proposal” after seeing what the Rancho Palos Verdes landslide zone has been dealing with, but similar bills in the past have failed.

“The Palos Verdes peninsula … has been witnessing what I call a slow-moving train wreck,” Muratsuchi testified at an Emergency Management Committee hearing last month. “Homes are being torn apart. … The road is being torn apart, utilities are being cut off. By any common sense definition: a natural disaster.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed slashing funding by 67% for a pioneering deal with Google to support struggling California newsrooms, citing financial pressures that have promoted wider budget cuts.

California newsrooms had expected to receive $30 million from the state as part of a deal brokered last year in which Google and the state would jointly contribute money over five years to support local newsrooms through a News Transformation Fund. The state Department of Finance confirmed Wednesday that California instead will pay out $10 million for the 2025-26 fiscal year.

“The sole reason for the reduction is more limited/fewer resources than projected in the January budget,” Department of Finance spokesperson H.D. Palmer said.

Newsom announced Wednesday that the state is facing an additional $12-billion budget shortfall next year. The revised $321.9-billion plan will also include a reduction in healthcare for low-income undocumented immigrants and a decrease in overtime hours for select government employees.

The deal was born of negotiations that began with a proposed funding bill written by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), which is known as the California Journalism Preservation Act. It would have required Google to pay into a fund annually that would have distributed millions to California news outlets based on the number of journalists they employ. The California News Publishers Assn., of which the Los Angeles Times is a member, backed the larger effort.

It was designed to aid newspapers that have seen their finances collapse in recent years, leaving fewer journalists to cover institutions and communities.

The proposal was modeled after a Canadian bill that has Google paying about $74 million per year. Google fought the bill, arguing its passage would force the company to remove California news from its platform, thus restricting access for Californians.

Instead, the state and Google agreed in August to provide nearly $250 million to newsrooms over five years, starting in 2025, with funding slated for two projects.

The second initiative was a $68-million pledge for Google to fund artificial intelligence in the form of a National AI Accelerator. The AI funding element of the deal drew sharp rebukes from Democratic lawmakers and journalists.

California had pledged $30 million in 2025 and $10 million for each of the next four years. Google agreed to an initial payment of $15 million in 2025 and $55 million in total into the journalism fund. Google also agreed to boost its own journalism programs with a separate $50-million grant.

Qatar’s role as a global mediator and a massive purchase of Boeing airliners were prime areas of focus in official talks between US President Donald Trump and Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani.

As President Trump parades through the Middle East this week, he will encounter a very different region than the one he experienced during his first term. True, the Israeli-Palestinian problem remains unresolved, as do the challenges emanating from Iran’s much-advanced nuclear program and the instability and dysfunction in Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Syria and Yemen.

But this old wine is now packaged in new bottles. Beyond the garish headlines of Trump’s plan to accept a Boeing 747 as a gift from Qatar, new trends are emerging that will redefine the region, posing additional challenges for U.S. policy.

Of all the changes in the Middle East since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel, perhaps the most striking is Israel’s emergence as a regional powerhouse. Aided by the administrations of Presidents Biden and Trump, and enabled by Arab regimes that do little to support Palestinians, Israel devastated Hamas and Hezbollah as military organizations, killing much of their senior leadership. With the support of the United States, Europe and friendly Arab states, it effectively countered two direct Iranian missile attacks on its territory.

Israel then delivered its own strike, reportedly destroying much of Iran’s ballistic missile production and air defenses. In short, Israel has achieved escalation dominance: the capacity to escalate (or not) as it sees fit, and to deter its adversaries from doing so. Israel has also redefined its concept of border security in Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank and Syria by acting unilaterally to preempt and prevent threats to its territory.

Converting Israel’s military power into political arrangements, even peace accords, would seem like a reasonable next step. But the right-wing government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems uninterested in such options and is unlikely to be induced to change its outlook. Moreover, securing new, lasting agreements also depends on whether there are leaders among the Palestinians and key Arab states ready to take up the challenge, with all the political risks it entails.

But the Arab world remains in serious disarray. At least five Arab states are dealing with profound internal challenges, leaving them in various degrees of dysfunction and state failure. Amid this power vacuum, two alternative power centers have emerged. The first are the states of the Persian Gulf, especially Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. Relatively unscathed by the Arab Spring and blessed with sovereign wealth funds, oil and natural gas, these stable authoritarian powers, particularly Saudi Arabia, have begun to play an outsize role in the region.

The second category comprises non-Arab states. Israel, Turkey and Iran are the only states in the region with the capacity to project significant military power beyond their borders. While each has suffered periods of internal unrest, they currently enjoy domestic stability. Each also boasts tremendous economic potential and significant security, military and intelligence capabilities, including the capability to manufacture weapons domestically.

One (Israel) is America’s closest regional ally, another (Turkey) is a member of NATO and a newfound power broker in Syria, and the third (Iran) retains considerable influence despite Israel’s mauling of its proxies Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran’s nuclear program keeps it relevant, even central, to both Israeli and American policymaking.

All three non-Arab states engender a good deal of suspicion and mistrust among Arab regimes but are nonetheless seen as key players whom no one wants to offend. All three are at odds — with each frustrating the others’ regional objectives — and all three are here to stay. Their influence will most likely only grow in the years to come, given the fractiousness of the Arab world.

In the immediate aftermath of the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, it seemed that the Palestinian issue was once again front and center, not just in the Arab world, but internationally. Those who claimed it had lost its resonance could point to the outpouring of sympathy and support for Gazan civilians as Israel’s war against Hamas led to a humanitarian catastrophe.

Moreover, the United Nations passed resolutions calling for an end to the war, many around the world condemned the war and Israel, the International Court of Justice took up the question of whether Israel is committing genocide, and the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu (as well as for Hamas’ military commander, later found to have been killed).

Nonetheless, it has become stunningly clear that, far from pushing the Palestinian issue to the top of the international agenda, the Oct. 7 attack has actually diminished its salience and left Palestinians isolated and without good options. Continued U.S. support for Israel’s war against Hamas, despite the exponential rise of Palestinian deaths, has protected Israel from negative consequences; key Arab regimes have done next to nothing to impose costs and consequences on Israel and the U.S. as Palestinian civilian deaths mount. The international community appears too fragmented, distracted and self-interested to act in any concerted way in defense of Palestine.

Meanwhile, the Palestinian national movement remains divided and dysfunctional, giving Palestinians an unpalatable choice between Hamas and the aging president of the Palestinian National Authority, Mahmoud Abbas. The prospects for anything resembling a two-state solution have never looked bleaker.

How the Trump administration will process these developments remains to be seen. Clearly, it has adopted a pro-Israel view, with Trump musing about turning Gaza into a Riviera-style resort. He has deployed his special envoy to the Middle East to secure the return of hostages taken by Hamas but has yet to invest in any postwar plan for the beleaguered enclave. Indeed, he has left the strategy for Gaza to Israel, which in turn has resumed its military campaign there. Trump has also acquiesced to Israel’s pursuit of aggressive border defenses against both Lebanon and Syria, while enabling Israel’s annexationist policies in the West Bank.

Yet Trump is nothing if not unpredictable. In April, he announced new U.S. negotiations with Iran in the presence of Netanyahu, who himself has tried to persuade the president that the only solution to Iran’s nuclear program is military action. But if U.S.-Iranian negotiations do advance, or if Trump’s interest in Israeli-Saudi normalization intensifies, he may find himself drawn into the Middle East negotiating bazaar, dealing with the intricacies of day-after planning in Gaza and a political horizon for Palestinians.

These paths are already fomenting tension between Trump, who will not be visiting Israel on his Middle East trip, and a recalcitrant Netanyahu. But given Trump’s absolute control over his party, Netanyahu will have few options to appeal to Republicans if the White House proposes policies that he opposes. As most U.S. allies have already learned, if Trump wants something, he’s not averse to using pressure to get it.

Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, is a former State Department Middle East analyst and negotiator in Republican and Democratic administrations and the author of “The End of Greatness: Why America Can’t Have (and Doesn’t Want) Another Great President.” Lauren Morganbesser is a junior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Gov. Gavin Newsom is proposing to accelerate his administration’s plan to build a $20-billion water tunnel beneath the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta by short-cutting permitting for the project and limiting avenues for legal challenges.

Newsom urged the Legislature on Wednesday to adopt his plan to “fast-track” the tunnel, called the Delta Conveyance Project, as part of his revised May budget proposal.

“For too long, attempts to modernize our critical water infrastructure have stalled in endless red tape, burdened with unnecessary delay. We’re done with barriers,” Newsom said. “Our state needs to complete this project as soon as possible, so that we can better store and manage water to prepare for a hotter, drier future. Let’s get this built.”

The tunnel would create a second route to transport water to the state’s pumping facilities on the south side of the Delta, where supplies enter the aqueducts of the State Water Project and are delivered to 27 million people and 750,000 acres of farmland.

Supporters of the plan, including water agencies in Southern California and Silicon Valley, say the state needs to build new infrastructure in the Delta to protect the water supply in the face of climate change and earthquake risks.

Opponents, including agencies in the Delta and environmental advocates, say the project is an expensive boondoggle that would harm the environment and communities, and that the state should pursue other alternatives.

“It’s a top-down push for an unaffordable, unnecessary tunnel that fails to solve the state’s real water challenges,” said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the group Restore the Delta.

She said the governor “wants to bypass the legal and public processes because the project doesn’t pass the economic or environmental standards Californians expect.”

Newsom, who is set to serve through 2026 and then leave office, is pushing to lay the groundwork for the project.

Newsom said his proposal would: simplify permitting by eliminating certain deadlines from water rights permits; narrow legal review to avoid delays from legal challenges; confirm that the state has authority to issue bonds to pay for the project, which would be repaid by water agencies; and accelerate state efforts to acquire land for construction.

Announcing the proposal, the governor’s office said that “while the project has received some necessary permits, its path forward is burdened by complicated regulatory frameworks and bureaucratic delays.”

The State Water Resources Control Board is currently considering a petition by the Newsom administration to amend water rights permits so that flows could be diverted from new points on the Sacramento River where the intakes of the 45-mile tunnel would be built.

The governor’s latest proposal was praised by water agencies including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which is currently spending about $142 million on the preliminary planning.

MWD General Manager Deven Upadhyay called Newsom’s proposal a “bold step” toward protecting water supplies, saying the approach would support completion of the planning work, reduce “regulatory and legal uncertainties,” and allow the MWD board to make an informed decision about whether to make a long-term investment to help foot the bill for construction.

Jennifer Pierre, general manager of the State Water Contractors, said the governor’s approach makes sense to address costly delays and upgrade essential infrastructure that is “in dire need of modernization.”

Environmental and fishing groups, however, called Newsom’s proposal a reckless attempt to bypass the existing legal process and make it harder for opponents to challenge the project over what they contend would be harmful effects on the Delta region and the environment.

Scott Artis, executive director of the Golden State Salmon Assn., a group that represents fishing communities, called Newsom’s proposal “an attack on the salmon fishing industry and the state’s biggest rivers.”

Commercial salmon fishing has been canceled for three consecutive years because of a decline in the Chinook salmon population. Artis said building the tunnel would represent a “nail in the coffin of California’s once mighty salmon runs.”

California is facing an additional $12-billion state budget shortfall next year, a deficit largely caused by overspending and that Gov. Gavin Newsom said was made worse by President Trump’s federal tariff policy.

“California is under assault,” Newsom said. “The United States of America, in many respects, is under assault because we have a president that’s been reckless.”

Newsom unveiled the forecast during a presentation Wednesday of his $321.9-billion revised spending plan that proposes walking back free healthcare for low-income undocumented immigrants, eliminating Medi-Cal benefits for expensive weight loss treatments and cutting back overtime hours for in-home supportive service workers, among dozens of other trims.

The new deficit comes in addition to $27.3 billion in fiscal remedies, including $16.1 billion in cuts and a $7.1-billion withdrawal from the state’s rainy day fund, that lawmakers and the governor already agreed to make in 2025-26.

The overall $39-billion shortfall marks the third year in a row that Newsom and lawmakers have been forced to reduce funding for state programs after dedicating more money than California has available to spend.

Newsom’s proposed cuts

Among the new cuts Newsom put on the table Wednesday is a call to cut back on his signature policy to provide free healthcare coverage to income-eligible undocumented immigrants.

Newsom is proposing freezing new Medi-Cal enrollment for undocumented adult immigrants as of Jan. 1 and requiring those over 18 to pay $100 monthly premiums to receive healthcare coverage through Medi-Cal.

The cost share will reduce the financial burden on the state and could lower the total number of people enrolled in the healthcare program if some immigrants cannot afford the new premiums. Freezing enrollment may prevent the price tag of the program from continuing to balloon after more people signed up for coverage than the state anticipated.

The changes offer minor savings of $116.5 million next year, with savings growing to $5.4 billion in 2028-29.

The governor is also following the federal government’s lead and cutting $85 million in benefits for Ozempic and other popular weight loss medications from all Medi-Cal coverage plans, while saving $333.3 million by eliminating long-term care benefits for some enrollees.

Newsom wants to cap overtime hours for in-home support service workers, according to his budget, to save $707.5 million next year.

The governor’s budget includes a controversial proposal to grab $1.3 billion in funding in 2025-26 from Proposition 35, a measure voters approved in November that dedicated the revenue from a tax on managed care organizations to primarily pay for increases to Medi-Cal provider rates. The decision is expected to draw pushback from a coalition of doctors, clinics, hospitals and other healthcare groups that supported the proposition, which nearly 68% of voters backed.

Under another cost-saving measure, the governor wants to shift $1.5 billion in funding for Cal Fire from the general fund. Instead, Newsom wants to provide that $1.5 billion from the greenhouse gas reduction fund paid for by proceeds of the state cap-and-trade program next year.

The governor’s budget proposes extending the cap-and-trade program — a first-of-its-kind initiative that sets limits on companies’ greenhouse gas emissions and allows them to buy additional credits at auction from the state, and he wants to dedicate at least $1 billion each year to high speed rail.

A spending deficit

The budget marks a continuation of years of overspending in California under the Newsom administration.

After predicting a lofty $100-billion surplus from federal COVID-19 stimulus funding and the resulting economic gains three years ago, Democrats have not reduced spending to match up with a return to normal after the pandemic.

Poor projections, the ballooning cost of Democratic policy promises and a reluctance to make long-term sweeping cuts have added to the deficit at a time when the governor regularly touts California’s place as the fourth largest economy in the world.

State revenues have exceeded expectations since April, but so has state spending.

Despite the shortfall, California has more money to spend than in the prior budget approved in June, and the governor and lawmakers still plan to take $7.1 billion from the state’s rainy day fund to cover the total 2025-26 deficit.

A “Trump Slump”

Though personal income tax and corporate tax receipts in the state came in $6.8 billion above projections through April, Newsom is predicting that overall revenues will be $16 billion lower than they could have been from January 2025 through June 2026 because of the economic impact of Trump’s tariffs.

The governor originally released the new information, which his team dubbed the “Trump Slump,” on the eve of the presentation of his revised 2025-26 state budget plan, seeking to blame the president for California’s expected revenue shortfall.

Trump in April implemented a series of tariffs on all imported goods, higher taxes on products from Mexico, Canada and China, and specific levies on products and materials such as autos and aluminum. The president has backed down from some of his tariffs, but Newsom alleges that the policies and economic uncertainty will lead to higher unemployment, inflation, lower GDP projections and less capital gains revenue for California.

California filed a lawsuit last month arguing that Trump lacks the authority to impose tariffs on his own. On Tuesday, the state said it will seek a preliminary injunction to freeze the tariffs in federal court.

When I think about the gleeful cruelty the Trump administration is showing toward illegal immigrants — including unlawfully deporting planeloads of them, seeking to suspend habeas corpus in order to kick out folks faster and wearing fancy Rolex watches while visiting a Salvadoran super prison — I think of Jose Toscano.

The Mexico City native came to Los Angeles as a 13-year-old and enrolled at St. Turibius School near the Fashion District, working at Magee’s Kitchen in the Farmers Market to pay his tuition, room and board. “I had this dream to come to the United States for education,” Toscano told The Times in May 1953. “Not for the dollars, not to work in the camps for 65 cents an hour.”

Why was The Times profiling a 16-year-old Mexican immigrant? Because he was about to get deported. Politicians, the press and private citizens had been railing against “illegal immigration” and pushing President Eisenhower for mass deportations. Officers received a tip that Toscano was in the country illegally.

This young migrant’s story struck a chord in Southern California in a way that’s unimaginable today

Newspaper accounts noted that immigration authorities — struck by Toscano’s pluck and drive — made sure that his deportation didn’t go on his record so he could legally return one day. A Van Nuys News and Valley Green Sheet columnist wrote, “We must have immigration laws — but they’re not designed for folks like Joe.”

Meanwhile, The Times’ editorial board — not exactly known back then for its kind attitude toward Mexican Americans — argued that Toscano shouldn’t be deported, making the case that laws “should perhaps be tempered a trifle in the face of principles and actions which are of such sterling worth as to be beyond the object of the law itself.”

Toscano legally returned to Los Angeles three months later, living with a white family in Whittier that sponsored him and enrolling at Cathedral High. “As I continue to study the history of your country in school,” he wrote to The Times that September, “I shall remember that what you did for me is one of the things that makes this country of yours so great.”

His story was such a feel-good tale that it appeared in Reader’s Digest and the local press checked in on Toscano for years. The Mirror, The Times’ afternoon sister paper, reported on his 1954 wedding, the same year that immigration officials deported over a million Mexican nationals under Operation Wetback, a program that President Trump and his supporters say they want to emulate today.

Two years later, The Times covered Toscano’s graduation from Fairfax High, where he told the crowd as the commencement speaker that he wanted to become an American citizen “so that I, too, can help build a greater America.”

After a three-year stint in the Marines, Toscano did just that in 1959, changing his legal name from Jose to Joseph because he felt “it’s more American that way,” he told the Mirror. He told the paper he had dreams of attending UCLA Law School, but life didn’t work out that way.

Lessons for today

The last clipping I found of Toscano in The Times is a 1980 Farmers Market ad, which noted that he was a widower with two daughters still working at Magee’s but had advanced from washing dishes to chief carver.

“He’s a happy man who likes his work,” the ad said, “and it shows.”

Rereading the clips about Toscano, I’m reminded of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran national who established a life for himself in this country before he was deported in March despite a judge’s order that he be allowed to remain in the United States.

This time around, immigration officials and the Trump White House have insisted Abrego Garcia deserved his fate, sliming him as a terrorist and MS-13 member despite no evidence to back up their assertions.

Toscano’s story shows that the story can have a different ending — if only immigration officials have a heart.

Today’s top stories

People enjoy pleasant spring weather while sailing in Newport Harbor. Orange County is one of three SoCal counties where single earners with six-figure salaries could soon be considered “low income.”

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

‘Low income’ but making $100,000 per year

Newsom walks back free healthcare for eligible undocumented immigrants

• The governor’s office said his spending plan, which will be released later this morning, calls for requiring all undocumented adults to pay $100 monthly premiums to receive Medi-Cal coverage and for blocking all new adult applications to the program as of Jan. 1.
• The cost of coverage for immigrants has exceeded state estimates by billions of dollars.

California joins another lawsuit against Trump

• California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta filed two lawsuits Tuesday challenging a Trump administration policy that would deny the state billions of dollars in transportation grants unless it follows the administration’s lead on immigration enforcement.
• California sued Trump 15 times in his first 100 days in office. Here’s where those cases stand.

California’s ethnic studies mandate is at risk

• California became a national pioneer four years ago by passing a law to make ethnic studies a high school graduation requirement.
• But only months before the policy is to take effect, Gov. Gavin Newsom is withholding state funding — delaying the mandate as the course comes under renewed fire.

What else is going on

Commentary and opinions

• Four months into insurance claim delays and disputes, a new blow to fire victims: A rate hike, writes columnist Steve Lopez.
• My neighborhood, Skid Row, is not exactly what you think it is, argues guest columnist Amelia Rayno.
• The Endangered Species Act is facing its own existential threat, contributor Marcy Houle says.

This morning’s must reads

Other must reads

For your downtime

(Marie Doazan for The Times)

Going out

Staying in

A question for you: What is your go-to karaoke song?

Stephen says: “Anything by Jim Croce.”
Alan says: “‘In My Life’ by The Beatles.”

Email us at [email protected], and your response might appear in the newsletter this week.

And finally … your photo of the day

Alice Weddle, 88, poses for a portrait before the Queens Tour at Kia Forum on Sunday in Inglewood.

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

Today’s great photo is from Times photographer Juliana Yamada at the Kia Forum where fans flocked to see legendary singers Chaka Khan, Patti LaBelle, Stephanie Mills and Gladys Knight perform their greatest hits.

Have a great day, from the Essential California team

Gustavo Arellano, California columnist
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected].

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2025-26 revised budget proposal reneges on his signature policy to provide free healthcare coverage to all low-income undocumented immigrants as costs exceed expectations and the state anticipates challenging economic times ahead.

Newsom’s office said the governor’s spending plan, which will be released late Wednesday morning, calls for requiring all undocumented adults to pay $100 monthly premiums to receive Medi-Cal coverage and for blocking all new adult applications to the program as of Jan. 1.

The cost share will reduce the financial burden on the state and could lower the total number of people enrolled in the healthcare program if some immigrants cannot afford the new premiums. Freezing enrollment may prevent the price tag of the program from continuing to balloon after more people signed up for coverage than the state anticipated.

The governor’s office said the changes will save a combined $5.4 billion through 2028-29, but did not detail the cost savings in the upcoming fiscal year that begins July 1.

Newsom is expected Wednesday to project a deficit for California in the fiscal year ahead, which includes higher than expected Medi-Cal costs, and more significant shortfall estimates in the following years. In the current budget year, the governor and lawmakers approved a $2.8-billion appropriation and took out a separate $3.4-billion loan just to pay for extra expenses for Medi-Cal through June.

The rising costs have drawn criticism from Republicans and added pressure on Democrats to consider scaling back coverage for immigrants. A recent poll found strong support among California voters for offering free healthcare to undocumented children. Just over half of voters supported providing the healthcare to eligible immigrants 50 years old or above, and a plurality — 49% — favored providing the coverage to adults between the ages of 18 and 49.

Medi-Cal, the California offshoot of the federal Medicaid program, provides healthcare coverage to eligible low-income residents. After the Republican Congress this year passed a budget blueprint that includes billions of dollars in spending reductions, fears also persist that cuts to federal Medicaid funding may be looming.

California became the first state in the nation to offer healthcare to all income-eligible immigrants one year ago after the expansion was approved by Newsom and the Democratic-led Legislature.

Gov. Jerry Brown, a Democrat, signed a bill in 2015 that offered Medi-Cal coverage to all children younger than 19.

Newsom grew the Medi-Cal coverage pool to include all income-eligible immigrants in California under a multiyear expansion by age categories that began in 2020 and concluded in 2024.

California’s new budget shortfall comes in addition to $27.3 billion in financial remedies, including $16.1 billion in cuts and a $7.1-billion withdrawal from the state’s rainy day fund, that lawmakers and the governor already agreed to make in 2025-26.

The deficit marks the third year in a row that Newsom and lawmakers have been forced to reduce spending after dedicating more money to programs than the state has available to spend. Poor projections, the high price tag of Democratic policy promises and a reluctance to make long-term sweeping cuts have added to the deficit at a time when the governor regularly touts California’s place as the fourth-largest economy in the world.

On Tuesday afternoon, Newsom’s office said President Trump’s tariff policies have also hurt California’s financial standing and projected that the state will lose out on $16 billion in revenue from January 2025 through June 2026 because of the levies on imported goods and the effect of economic uncertainty on the stock market.

SACRAMENTO — In the largest gathering of 2026 gubernatorial candidates to date, seven Democrats vying to lead California courted labor leaders on Monday, vowing to support pro-union agreements on housing and infrastructure projects, regulation of artificial intelligence, and government funding for university research.

Throughout most of the hourlong event, the hundreds of union members inside the Sacramento hotel ballroom embraced the pro-labor pledges and speeches that dominated the candidates’ remarks, though some boos rose from the crowd when former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa strayed from the other Democrats on stage.

Villaraigosa was the only candidate to raise objections when asked if he would support providing state unemployment benefits to striking workers, saying it would depend on the nature and length of the labor action. Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2023 vetoed a bill that would have provided that coverage, saying it would make the state’s unemployment trust fund “vulnerable to insolvency.”

The Monday night event was part of a legislative conference held by the California Federation of Labor Unions and the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, two of the most influential labor organizations in the state capital.

Villaraigosa was joined on stage by former state Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra, Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, former Rep. Katie Porter of Irvine, state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and former state Controller Betty Yee. All are running to replace Newsom, who is serving his second and final term as governor.

Throughout most of the event, the candidates were peppered with yes-or-no questions, answering with the wave of a red flag for “no” or green flag for “yes.”

The event was not without its frosty moments, including when the candidates were asked whether, as governor, they would be “pragmatic and stop targeting California’s oil and gas industry in ways that jeopardize union jobs and force us to rely on dirtier imported energy.”

Some of the candidates raised their green flags timidly. California’s Democratic leaders, including Newsom and top state lawmakers, have been major proponents of transitioning to renewable energy and imposing more restrictions on the state’s oil and gas industry.

“We all want a clean environment going forward,” Yee said, “but it cannot be on the backs of workers.”

Villaraigosa, in remarks after the event, said he challenged the idea of jumping into electrification too quickly, which would affect union jobs and increase the cost of utilities and energy across the state.

“Closing down refineries, telling people to get rid of their gas stove and gas water heater is just poppycock,” he said.

Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Labor Federation, praised the Democratic candidates for showing strong support for unionized workers. She’s hopeful that each would be more receptive to some pivotal union concerns than Newsom, such as the regulation of artificial intelligence, a major threat to union jobs, she said.

“When we’re talking about things like regulating AI — we can’t even get a conversation out of Gavin Newsom about any regulation — I think that was, that was a key thing. They all threw up their green flag,” Gonzalez said.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris, who is weighing a run for governor, declined an invitation to address the conference.

The State Building and Construction Trades Council represents hundreds of thousands of workers in the state, including bricklayers, ironworkers and painters, among many others.

The Labor Federation is a formidable power in California politics and policy, expected to help coordinate the spending of as much as $40 million by unions in next year’s election. The federation is an umbrella group for about 1,300 unions that represent around 2.3 million workers in the public and private sectors.

The organization has backed all of the gubernatorial candidates in various prior races, although it opposed Villaraigosa in the 2005 mayor’s race and supported Newsom over Villaraigosa in the 2018 gubernatorial race.

The latter decision was driven by the arc Villaraigosa has taken from his roots as a union leader to a critic of Los Angeles’ teachers union and supporter of charter schools and reform of teacher-tenure rules.

Times staff writer Phil Willon contributed to this report.

California became a national pioneer four years ago by passing a law to make ethnic studies a high school graduation requirement. But only months before the policy is to take effect, Gov. Gavin Newsom is withholding state funding — delaying the mandate as the course comes under renewed fire.

The pause has left school districts throughout the state in limbo nearly four years after the launch deadline was set. Beginning this fall, students entering 9th grade would have been the first class required to pass a one-semester class at some point during their high school years.

But under the 2021 law, the mandate to reach 5.8 million students does not take effect unless the state provides more money to pay for the course. The funding would cover the cost of materials and the teacher staffing and training that go along with adding a new field of study.

Newsom’s office, which will issue its May revision of next year’s proposed state budget Wednesday amid a tightening financial outlook, did not respond to questions about why he has not included funding for the ethnic studies requirement that he approved, praising it as an avenue to “teach students about the diverse communities that comprise California.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Finance answered on Newsom’s behalf.

“The budget doesn’t include funding that would trigger the ethnic studies graduation requirement,” said H.D. Palmer. As to the reason why, “the short answer is that the state has limited available ongoing resources.”

At the onset, $50 million in seed money was allocated statewide, but the law stated an additional unspecified amount would be needed in the future. State officials later set that amount at about $276 million. But several years have passed without state officials budgeting the funding.

As California’s more than 1,600 high schools wind down for the year, it is uncertain how many will offer the course in the fall. Some — including Los Angeles Unified, Santa Monica Unified and Alhambra Unified — will go forward with ethnic studies no matter what. Some of these districts, including L.A. Unified, already have their own ethnic studies graduation requirement.

Others — including Chino Valley Unified — will shelve the class until the law forces them to offer it.

Still others, such as Lynwood Unified, in south L.A. County, say they are deeply concerned about any wavering in the state’s commitment to the subject.

State funding would be “critically important for sustainability,” according to a Lynwood district statement. Without it, the school district is going to cancel the course and instead teach units of ethnic studies within other classes.

“We remain committed to the principles and purpose behind ethnic studies — ensuring our students see themselves and others reflected in the curriculum,” Lynwood Supt. Gudiel R. Crosthwaite said. “However, like many school districts across California, we are navigating the dual challenge of declining enrollment and insufficient state funding to support new course mandates.”

Renewed controversy

The current political environment complicates the launch of the ethnic studies requirement.

State officials were moving toward an ethnic studies requirement amid the nation’s racial reckoning after the 2020 murder of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police, the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, and violent attacks on Asian Americans.

Many ethnic studies supporters believe that anti-racist teachings and exploring the history and perspectives of marginalized groups — Black and Indigenous people, Asians and Latinos — are key to bridging misunderstanding among students, reducing racial and ethnic conflict, and motivating teenagers to pursue social justice causes.

But not everyone sees ethnic studies the same way. Some religious and political conservatives view the state’s guidelines for ethnic studies as the kind of “woke” ideologies in education that President Trump has vowed to eliminate as he seeks to do away with diversity, equity and inclusion programming in schools.

California’s ethnic studies curriculum guide embraces pro-LGBTQ+ content and speaks of connecting students to “contemporary social movements that struggle for social justice and an equitable and democratic society, and conceptualize, imagine, and build new possibilities for a post-racist, post-systemic-racism society.”

With tensions high over how race, religion and ethnicity are taught in schools, state lawmakers recently explored legislation that would have put strict standards on how ethnic studies could be taught. That bill was supported by 31 legislators and its sponsors expressed particular concern about how ethnic studies teachers are presenting Jews and the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — re-igniting long-simmering concerns about the field of study.

Amid weekend discussions, however, the group shelved the bill — which dealt only with ethnic studies. Instead, lawmakers unveiled a broader piece of school legislation aimed at ending campus antisemitism while providing greater “anti-discrimination protections related to nationality and religion.”

A hearing on the new bill is set for Wednesday.

Teacher Amber Palma talks with student Angel Alvarez during an ethnic studies class at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood.

(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)

Although the bill’s provisions are still being crafted, it would apply to any course or schooling activity — and include a mechanism for stronger oversight of K-12 ethnic studies, which remains central to the concerns of the bill’s primary sponsors, including Assemblymember Dawn Addis (D-Morro Bay).

“Jewish families and children have been made, in many instances, to feel unwelcome or made the targets of hate and discrimination in school — where they’re supposed to feel safe and supported,” Addis said. “We want to get all the things in place to get back to what schools are supposed to be doing.”

Troy Flint, chief communications officer for the California School Boards Assn. said the ethnic studies requirement “has been fraught since its inception, and there have been starts, stumbles and restarts to try and develop a piece of legislation that’s amenable to all the different interest groups. … And I don’t know that we’ve reached that point yet.”

“School districts are in a bind,” both in terms of their costs and their academic program, he added, “because there’s a possibility a mandate could be implemented, but it’s uncertain.”

(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)

What’s happened since the law was approved?

Newsom signed the ethnic studies graduation requirement into law in 2021, giving districts four years to develop one or more ethnic studies classes, using a menu of materials and topics from the nearly 700-page state model curriculum guide, approved by the State Board of Education.

That curriculum guide had been a source of controversy — leading Newsom to veto an earlier bill for an ethnic studies requirement. After substantial revisions, the final version eliminated course materials that likened the Palestinian cause, in its conflict with Israel, to the struggles of marginalized groups in America — because critics said it lacked balance or nuance.

The revision also toned down what critics characterized as obscure academic jargon and bias against capitalism. More groups were added as potential study topics, including Jewish Americans, Sikhs and Armenians.

Under current law, the state’s model curriculum serves as a guide — not a required set of lessons. School districts are responsible for developing their courses and are free to teach units that reflect their enrollment. Students in Glendale, with its large Armenian American population, for example, could study the Armenian immigrant experience.

(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)

This flexibility has allowed academic experts in the field to prepare prepackaged courses and lessons that vary widely to help schools prepare. Some are free to download. Independent Institute, for example, has posted one free curriculum that consciously aims to be less controversial in terms of current political disputes.

The group with perhaps the most long-standing ties to the field of ethnic studies in California has created a curriculum called Liberated Ethnic Studies. This curriculum also is free to download, although some of its creators and supporters have worked as school district consultants.

A portion of the Liberated content guide has worried a coalition of Jewish groups who contend portions of the curriculum veer toward antisemitism. Their concerns have fueled ongoing debate in Sacramento about the need for stricter course standards.

(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)

Creators of the Liberated materials had been involved in writing the first version of the state’s model curriculum — which also was criticized by Jewish groups and legislators. State officials ultimately removed the Liberated academics from involvement in the state’s curriculum guide. And the academics, in turn, disowned the state curriculum guide and created their own materials.

A leader of the Liberated curriculum effort, Cal State Northridge professor of Chicano and Chicana studies Theresa Montaño, said she does not know how may school districts are using their lessons because they can be downloaded for free. She estimated that 70% of the Liberated content is virtually identical to the state’s revised model curriculum.

She said concerns about politicized content are overwrought.

“Ethnic studies was born out of a movement to begin to make certain that communities of color have the rightful location in the curriculum,” Montaño said.

She added that the scholars who put together the Liberated contents are recognized leading experts in an academically rigorous field that has developed over the last 60 years.

Students take part in an activity during an ethnic studies class at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood.

(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)

What’s happening in the classroom?

Ethnic studies teacher Amber Palma teaches at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood and virtually all of her students are Latino with immigrant backgrounds — and some degree of current political context is unavoidable.

“If the class is about your identity and your place in this American society — and that is a real social political issue that you are facing in context as we speak — you can’t say we’re going to not talk about what’s happening,” Palma said. “You have to address concerns, as you would with any class, with any kids.”

“Given our climate and the challenges that our students and their families and their communities are facing, I think we really do need to push the sense of empowerment, a sense of agency,” said Palma, whose district developed its own curriculum.

Students listen as teacher Amber Palma leads a discussion during an ethnic studies class at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood.

(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)

“If done right, ethnic studies is a good thing for all students,” said David Bocarsly, executive director of Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California, a lobbying group whose positions include supporting Israel’s right to exist. “Unfortunately … we have seen far too many instances of factually inaccurate and antisemitic content entering classrooms,” he said.

Bocarsly said members of his coalition of Jewish groups estimate there are real or potential problems in several dozen school districts among the 1,000 in California, based on issues that have emerged. The extent to which the Liberated curriculum is used in these districts has not been determined.

Assemblymember Addis is concerned that there could be inappropriate elements of Liberated’s alleged bias affecting “hundreds and hundreds” of school districts up and down the state.

In April, the California Department of Education concluded that two Bay Area ethnic studies teachers in the Campbell Union High School District violated California law when they included content related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that was allegedly biased and discriminated against Jewish students.

How are school districts responding?

A winter clash in the Palo Alto, Calif., school district underscores the kinds of debates that have unfolded about the course.

In a district with 40% Asian enrollment, some complained the course defined power and privilege in a way that discounted the hard work that resulted in prosperity for many immigrants. Critics also accused district officials of a lack of transparency and of not allowing for meaningful input into course content. Some were concerned that topics would be divisive.

“As feared, rancor has ensued,” said Lauren Janov, a critic of the Liberated curriculum and co-founder of Palo Alto Parent Alliance. “From the start, the state lost control of ethnic studies.”

In January, the Palo Alto board approved its own ethnic studies requirement by a 3-2 vote.

In February, Santa Ana Unified shelved three ethnic studies classes as part of a legal settlement reached with a coalition of Jewish groups. The groups had filed a lawsuit alleging that secrecy and antisemitism defined the district’s ethnic studies rollout.

The district still offers various other ethnic studies courses and has no plans to reverse policy, regardless of state funding, a district spokesperson said.

Student Arianne Moreno distributes an assignment during an ethnic studies class at Firebaugh High School in Lynwood.

(Hon Wing Chiu / For The Times)

In San Bernardino County, the Chino Valley Unified school board president also raises cost as an issue but sees the mandate pause as an opportunity to step back from ethnic studies.

“We made it clear that the course will not be implemented unless the state mandate goes into effect,” said Sonja Shaw, a pro-Trump Republican who is running for state superintendent of public instruction.

“Much of the ethnic studies already being pushed reflects divisive, politically driven ideology that doesn’t unite students; it separates them. …While kids are falling behind in reading, writing and math, the state continues to push its political agendas onto children,” Shaw said.

In Los Angeles Unified, the state’s largest school system, 11 courses can satisfy the district’s requirement, including a broad survey course and more specialized classes, such as African American Literature, American Indian Studies and Exploring Visual Arts through Ethnic Studies.

WASHINGTON — House Republicans proposed sweeping tax breaks Monday in President Trump’s big priority bill, tallying at least $4.9 trillion in costs so far, partly paid for with cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and green energy programs used by millions of Americans.

The House Ways and Means Committee named its package “THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL” in all capital letters, a nod to Trump himself. It seeks to extend the tax breaks approved during Trump’s first term — and boost the standard deduction, child tax credit and estate tax exemption — while adding new tax breaks on tipped wages, overtime pay, Social Security benefits and auto loans that Trump promised during his campaign for the White House.

There’s also a tripling of the state and local tax deduction, called SALT, from $10,000 up to $30,000 for couples, which certain high-tax state GOP lawmakers from New York and California already rejected as too meager. Private universities would be hit with a hefty new tax on their endowments, as much as 21%, as the Trump administration goes after the Ivy League and other campuses. And one unusual provision would terminate the tax-exempt status of groups the State Department says support “terrorists,” which civil society advocates warn is a way to potentially punish those at odds with the Trump administration.

Overall, the package is touching off the biggest political debate over taxes, spending and the nation’s priorities in nearly a decade. Not since 2017 has Congress wrestled with legislation as this, when Republicans approved the Trump tax cuts but also failed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. The cost assessments are only preliminary, and expected to soar.

“Republicans need to UNIFY,” Trump posted on social media before departing for a trip to the Middle East.

Trump said when he returns to Washington, “we will work together on any and all outstanding issues, but there shouldn’t be many — The Bill is GREAT. We have no alternative, WE MUST WIN!”

But one key Republican, Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, implored his party not to impair Medicaid, arguing that cutting healthcare to pay for tax breaks is both “morally wrong and politically suicidal.”

“If Republicans want to be a working-class party — if we want to be a majority party — we must ignore calls to cut Medicaid and start delivering on America’s promise for America’s working people,” Hawley wrote in the New York Times.

Late Monday, the House Agriculture Committee released its proposals — cutting $290 billion from federal nutrition programs, in part by shifting costs to the states and requiring able-bodied adults without dependents to fulfill work requirements until they are 64 years old, rather than 54, to qualify for food aid.

Round-the-clock work ahead

As Republicans race toward House Speaker Mike Johnson’s Memorial Day deadline to pass Trump’s big bill, they are preparing to flood the zone with round-the-clock public hearings starting Tuesday and stitch the various sections together in what will become a massive package.

The politics ahead are uncertain. The bipartisan Joint Committee on Taxation said Monday that tax breaks would reduce revenue by $4.9 trillion over the decade — and that was before Trump’s new tax breaks were included.

Texas Rep. Chip Roy, a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, warned the price tag could climb to $20 trillion, piling onto the deficits and debt.

“I sure hope House & Senate leadership are coming up with a backup plan,” Roy posted on social media, “…. because I’m not here to rack up an additional $20 trillion in debt over 10 years.”

House Republicans have been huddling behind closed doors, working out final provisions in the 389-page tax portion of the package.

The legislation proposes to boost the standard deduction many Americans use by $2,000, to $32,000 per household, and increase the child tax credit from $2,000 to $2,500 for four years. It adds a new requirement focused on preventing undocumented immigrants from benefiting from the credit even if the children are U.S. citizens, which the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank, estimates would affect 4.5 million children who are U.S. citizens or lawful residents.

It would also increase the estate tax exemption, which is now $14 million, to $15 million and index future increases to inflation.

As for the president’s promises, the legislation includes Trump’s “no taxes on tips” pledge, providing a deduction for those workers in service industry and other jobs that have traditionally relied on tips. It directs the Treasury secretary to issue guidance to avoid businesses gaming the system.

The package also provides tax relief for automobile shoppers with a temporary deduction of up to $10,000 on car loan interest, applying the benefit only for those vehicles where the final assembly occurred in the United States. The tax break would expire at the end of Trump’s term.

For seniors, there would be a bolstered $4,000 deduction on Social Security wages for those with adjusted incomes no higher than $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for couples.

But one hard-fought provision, the deduction for state and local taxes known as SALT, appears to be a work in progress. The legislation proposes lifting the cap to $15,000 for single filers and $30,000 for couples, but with a reduction at higher incomes — about $200,000 for singles and $400,000 for couples.

“Still a hell no,” wrote Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) on social media.

Battle over Medicaid, food aid

Meanwhile, dozens of House Republicans have told Johnson and GOP leaders they will not support cuts to Medicaid, which provides some 70 million Americans with healthcare, nor to green energy tax breaks that businesses back home have been relying on to invest in new wind, solar and renewable projects.

All told, 11 committees in the House have been compiling their sections of the package as Republicans seek at least $1.5 trillion in savings to help cover the cost of preserving the 2017 tax breaks, which are expiring at the end of the year.

The final section from the Agriculture Committee proposed cutting the Supplemental Nutrition and Assistance Program, known as SNAP, by expanding work requirements, limiting future expansions of the program and forcing states to shoulder more of the cost.

Along with new work requirements for older Americans, it would also require some parents of children older than 7 to work to qualify, down from 18 years old. Only areas with unemployment rates over 10% would be eligible for waivers.

Some Republicans have already balked at the increased costs to the states, which would be required to contribute at least 5% of the cost of SNAP allotments beginning in 2028.

At the same time, the legislation would invest $60 billion in new money for agriculture programs, sending aid to farmers.

On Sunday, House Republicans on the Energy and Commerce Committee unveiled the cost-saving centerpiece of the package, with at least $880 billion in cuts largely to Medicaid to help cover the cost of the tax breaks.

While Republicans insist they are simply rooting out “waste, fraud and abuse” to generate savings with new work and eligibility requirements, Democrats warn that millions of Americans will lose coverage. In the 15 years since Obamacare became law, Medicaid has only expanded as most states have tapped into federal funds.

A preliminary estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the proposals would reduce the number of people with healthcare by 8.6 million.

To be eligible for Medicaid, there would be new “community engagement requirements” of at least 80 hours per month of work, education or service for able-bodied adults without dependents. People would also have to verify their eligibility to be in the program twice a year, rather than just once.

There are substantial cuts proposed for green energy programs and tax breaks, rolling back climate-change strategies from the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act.

Mascaro and Freking write for the Associated Press. AP writers Amanda Seitz, Leah Askarinam and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

Good morning. I’m Gustavo Arellano, columnista, writing from Orange County and watching my tomato seedlings grow. Here’s what you need to know to start your day.

Montebello’s ex-mayor turns to Orange County

Frank Gomez was born to be an L.A. County politician.

His grandfather attended Roosevelt High with pioneering Eastside congressmember Ed Roybal and helped to fight off a proposed veteran’s hospital in Hazard Park. His mother went to Belvedere Middle School with longtime L.A. councilmember Richard Alatorre. His father taught Chicano political titans Gil Cedillo and Vickie Castro in high school. When Gomez won a seat on the Montebello Unified School District board of trustees in 1997, Richard Polanco — the Johnny Appleseed-meets-Scrooge McDuck of Latino politics in California — helped out his campaign.

That’s why people were surprised in 2013 when Gomez — by then a Montebello council member who had served a year as mayor — announced he was leaving L.A. County altogether to marry his current wife.

“I had the choice between politics and love,” said the 61-year-old during a recent breakfast in Santa Ana. “It was an easy choice.”

Gomez couldn’t stay away from politics for long

Today, Gomez leads STEM initiatives for the Cal State system and is also the chair of the Central Orange County Democratic Club, which covers Orange, Tustin, parts of unincorporated Orange County “and a few voters in Villa Park,” Gomez told me with a chuckle.

He’s headed the Central O.C. Dems since last year, and has grown them from about 60 members to over 300. Soft-spoken but forceful, Gomez likes to apply his background as a chemistry professor — “We need to be strategic and analytical” — in helping to build a Democratic bench of elected officials in a region that was a long a GOP stronghold before becoming as purple as Barney the Dinosaur.

I knew Gomez’s name but didn’t realize his L.A. political background until we met last month. That makes him a rare one: someone who has dabbled in both L.A. and Orange county politics, two worlds that rarely collide because each considers the other a wasteland.

As someone who has covered O.C. politics for a quarter century but has only paid attention to L.A. politics in earnest since I started with The Times in 2019, I have my thoughts about each scene’s differences and similarities. But what about Gomez?

From one cutthroat political scene to another

“In L.A., it’s Democrats against Democrats,” he replied. “It’s not like I didn’t know” what to expect when moving to O.C., he said. “But it’s the difference between Fashion Island and the Citadel.”

He thought his days in politics were over until 2022, when his stepson — who had interned with longtime Irvine politico Larry Agran — urged him to run for a seat on the Tustin City Council.

Commence Gomez’s true “Welcome to the O.C., bitch” moment.

Opponents sent out mailers with photos of garbage cans and graffiti and the message, “Do not bring L.A. to Tustin,” a political insult introduced to Orange County politics that year by Dist. Atty. Todd Spitzer.

“Those gated communities still try to keep their unsaid redlining,” Gomez said. “It wasn’t like that in L.A. politics because there was no place for it.”

Racist L.A. City Hall audio leak notwithstanding, of course.

Trying to topple O.C.’s last remaining GOP congressmember

Gomez unsuccessfully ran last year for a seat on the Municipal Water District of Orange County. He now plans to focus his political energies on growing the Central O.C. Dems and figuring out how to topple Rep. Young Kim, O.C.’s last remaining GOP congressmember. In the meanwhile, he will continue his political salons at the Central O.C. Dems’ monthly meetings at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Tustin — I was on the hot seat in April, and upcoming guests include coastal O.C. Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris, O.C. supervisorial candidate Connor Traut and former congressmember and current California gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter.

“It’s like being in the classroom,” Gomez said as he packed up his leftovers. “All I do is ask the questions and keep it flowing.”

He smiled. “Johnny Carson on intellectual steroids.”

Today’s top stories

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem arrives for a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security oversight hearing on Thursday on Capitol Hill in Washington.

(Julia Demaree Nikhinson / Associated Press)

The Trump administration will investigate L.A. County

• The administration announced Monday that it has launched an investigation into California’s Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants.
• The state program provides monthly cash benefits to elderly, blind and disabled noncitizens who are ineligible for Social Security benefits because of their immigration status.

Newsom urges cities to ban homeless camps

• The governor’s plan asks localities to prohibit persistent camping and encampments that block sidewalks.
• This is an escalation from last year, when Newsom ordered California agencies to clear homeless camps from state lands.

How to understand the recent trade deals

Inside the investigation into faulty evacuation alerts during the wildfires in January

• Software glitches, cellphone provider mixups and poor wording on the alert itself compounded to stoke confusion.
• On Jan. 9, residents across the region received a wireless emergency alert urging them to prepare to evacuate.
• Meanwhile, western Altadena, where 17 people died, got its evacuation order many hours after the Eaton fire exploded.

What else is going on

Get unlimited access to the Los Angeles Times. Subscribe here.

This morning’s must reads

Black nationalist leader Malcolm X, left, and Louis Farrakhan, chief minister of the Nation of Islam’s Boston mosque, right, attend a rally at Lennox Avenue and 115th Street in the Harlem section of New York in 1963.

(Robert Haggins / Associated Press)

Ibram X. Kendi is ready to introduce kids to Malcolm X: ‘Racism is worse in times of tragedy’ Ibram X. Kendi discusses introducing Malcolm X to today’s young readers and the timing of his new book in light of President Trump’s anti-DEI actions.

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected].

For your downtime

The Pasadena Playhouse

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Going out

Staying in

A question for you: What’s your favorite karaoke song?

Peg says: “David Bowie’s Life on Mars!”
Paul says “My Way.” (We’re assuming he means by Frank Sinatra)

Keep the suggestions coming. Email us at [email protected], and your response might appear in the newsletter this week.

And finally … your photo of the day

Wet Magazine Issue 3 from October/November 1976

(Photography and design by Leonard Koren)

Today’s great photo is from the archives: Leonard Koren began documenting L.A. bathing culture back in 1976 with Wet magazine, which featured contributions from David Lynch, Debbie Harry and Ed Ruscha.

Have a great day, from the Essential California team

Gustavo Arellano, California columnist
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters

Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

Homeless encampments are dirty. And ugly. And seem, to those who venture near them and even to some who live there, unsafe.

They are also — sadly, wrongly — places of last resort for those whose second, third and even fourth chances haven’t panned out, sometimes through their own mistakes, sometimes because they’re so far down just staying alive is a battle. Though we tend to toss homelessness in the soup pot along with mental illness and drug use, the terrifying fact is that nearly half of the folks living on our streets are over the age of 50 and wound up there because a bit of bad luck left them unable to pay the rent.

“At the end of the day, we have a homelessness crisis because we don’t have enough housing,” Margot Kushel said. She’s a professor of medicine at UC San Francisco and director of the UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative. There’s really no one in the state who understands encampments and their residents better.

Which is why I am deeply disheartened by Gov. Gavin Newsom’s push Monday to encourage cities and counties to outlaw encampments — even providing a handy-dandy boilerplate ordinance for local governments to pass. It moves California one step closer to criminalizing homelessness, no matter how softly or deftly he packages that truth.

Or how politically expedient it may be.

“It is time to take back the streets. It’s time to take back the sidewalks. It’s time to take these encampments and provide alternatives,” Newsom said. “It simply cannot continue. It cannot be a way of life living out on the streets, in sidewalks, in what almost become permanent structures, impeding foot traffic, impeding our ability for our kids to walk the streets and strollers, or seniors with disabilities and wheelchairs, even navigating their sidewalks. We cannot allow that to continue.”

From a political perspective, that tirade is spot on. The clock is already ticking on the 2026 midterms, which coincide with the end of his tenure as California’s leader. Not only is Newsom eyeing the horizon for his next move, presidential or not, but Democrats are eyeing the condition of California and whether Trump and his supporters will be able to once again use it as the example of everything that’s wrong with America, as they did in both 2020 and 2024.

Even Kushel, who near daily hears the heartbreaking reasons people are homeless, knows encampments aren’t the answer.

“I do think the encampments are a disaster,” she said. “I want them gone too.”

But, not at the cost of making things worse, which is what breaking them down without a place to put people does. Newsom’s draft ordinance makes nice talk about not criminalizing folks, but also doesn’t require more than “every reasonable effort” to provide shelter to those being displaced — knowing full well that we don’t have enough shelter beds.

It also talks nice about not throwing out people’s belongings, unless maybe they have bugs or feces on them — which, let’s be real, they might — in which case, the dumpster it is, even if that bundle may contain your identification or medications.

That constant loss, constant movement, not only sets people back even more, it also breaks trust and pushes people further out of sight and out of society. So by the time there are shelter beds or treatment centers, you’ve lost cooperation from the people you want to help. Homelessness becomes even more dystopian, if more invisible.

“I actually worry that making people move every day, threatening them with arrest, all of those things make the problem worse and not better,” Kushel said.

Some might recall that this new age of compassionate crackdowns began last year after the Supreme Court ruled in Grants Pass vs. Johnson that it wasn’t cruel or unusual punishment to outlaw camping in public spaces — allowing municipalities to cite or arrest those who did. Newsom’s office took the side of the city of Grants Pass, Ore., filing a brief in support of more enforcement powers. Since then, Newsom — sometimes personally with camera crews in tow — has cleared more than 16,000 encampments on state lands.

Some cities have followed suit with tough laws of their own, including San José. But other cities have resisted, much to Newsom’s dismay.

In Grants Pass, things didn’t go exactly as planned. There’s currently an injunction against its enforcement on camping laws after Disability Rights Oregon sued the city. Tom Stenson, the group’s deputy legal director, told me that the organization has seen how the anti-camping laws have been hard on folks with physical or mental impairments, many of whom are older.

As the housing crunch hit that state, the low-rent places where his plaintiffs lived “disappeared, and then there is just nowhere for them to go, and it just forces them right into homelessness,” he said.

California’s struggle around homelessness has been a black eye and a contentious soft spot for years, and even the most sympathetic of Californians are tired of the squalor and pain. A recent poll by Politico and the Citrin Center for Public Opinion Research at UC Berkeley found that about 37% of voters support arresting folks if they refuse to accept shelter, and that number jumped for male voters and Republicans.

Homelessness is, without a doubt, “the issue that defines more anger and frustration of Californians than any other,” as Newsom put it.

On the same day Newsom put out his legal template for clearing encampments, he also announced $3.3 billion in funding for 124 mental health facilities around the state. It’s money from last year’s Proposition 1, passed by voters, that will add 5,000 residential treatment beds and more than 21,000 outpatient slots to our struggling system of mental health and substance abuse treatment.

The grants include $65 million for Los Angeles to refurbish the Metropolitan State Hospital campus in Norwalk into a psychiatric subacute facility for transitional-age youths, a big and glaring need for the region.

To steal from the history lesson Newsom gave, in 1959 this state had 37,000 mental health beds in locked facilities, the kind that inspired “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.” Not ideal.

So the state did away with them, through a series of necessary reforms. But it never built the community-based system that was promised. California is now down to 5,500 locked beds and a bunch of overcrowded, understaffed, outdated jails and prisons that have become our de facto mental health treatment centers, along with the streets. Not ideal.

This investment in a robust community care system that provides both substance abuse and mental health treatment in one place is a huge win for all Californians, and will be a game changer — in about 10 years. Newsom optimistically showed pretty renderings of facilities that will be built with the funds, one even expected to open next year. But folks, building takes time.

Still, Newsom should receive all credit due for taking on a problem ignored for decades and doing something meaningful around it. I’ve seen him act thoughtfully, carefully and forcefully on the issue of homelessness.

Which makes this encampment right-wing swing all the more obviously political, and unworthy of our policy.

Despite those encampments, homelessness in California is actually getting better, though you have to wade through the numbers to see it. There were 187,000 people living without homes in the state last year, according to federal data, a record. About 70% of those people were living unsheltered, more than 45,000 in the city of Los Angeles.

Although the sheer number of people living without homes is overwhelming, it represented an increase of about 3% — compared with an increase of about 18% nationally. Across the country, but not in California, families were the group with the largest single-year increase.

So what we are doing, with policies that prioritize housing and meeting people where they are, is working. What Newsom has done to build a community care system is overdue and revolutionary.

But the fact remains that California does not have enough housing. Clearing encampments may be a political solution to an ugly problem.

But without a place to move people, it’s just optics.

So-called Hollywood ambassadors Jon Voight and Sylvester Stallone joined with a coalition of entertainment industry groups for a letter delivered this week to President Trump urging him to support tax measures and a federal tax incentive that would help bring film and TV production back to the U.S.

The letter is signed by Voight, Stallone, all the major Hollywood unions and trade groups such as the Motion Picture Assn., the Producers Guild of America and the Independent Film & Television Alliance, indicating widespread support from the entertainment industry.

“Returning more production to the United States will require a national approach and broad-based policy solutions … as well as longer term initiatives such as implementing a federal film and television tax incentive,” the letter states.

In the letter, which was obtained by The Times, the groups say they support Trump’s proposal to create a new 15% corporate tax rate for domestic manufacturing activities that would use a provision from the old Section 199 of the federal tax code as a model.

Under the previous Section 199, which expired in 2017, film and TV productions that were made in the U.S. qualified as domestic manufacturing and were eligible for that tax deduction, the letter states.

The letter also asks Trump to extend Section 181 of the federal tax code and increase the caps on tax-deductible qualified film and TV production expenditures, as well as reinstating the ability to carry back losses, which the groups say would give production companies more financial stability.

The tax measures — particularly Sections 199 and 181 — are issues the entertainment industry has long advocated for, according to two people familiar with the matter who were not authorized to comment publicly. The letter itself came together over the weekend, they said. It was intended to present different measures that shared the same goal of increasing domestic production, one person said.

“Everything we can do to help producers mange their budgets is important,” said Susan Sprung, chief executive of the Producers Guild of America. “In an ideal world, we’d want a federal tax incentive, in addition to these tax provisions, but we want to advocate to make it as easy as possible to produce in the United States and make it as cost-effective as possible.”

Last week, Trump threw the entertainment industry into chaos after initially suggesting a 100% tariff on films made in other countries. Then, California Gov. Gavin Newsom jumped into the mix, calling for a $7.5-billion federal tax incentive to keep more productions in the U.S.

The proposals on the federal level come as states are upping their own film and TV tax credits to better compete against each other and other countries. Late last week, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed the state’s budget, which increased the cap for its film tax credit to $800 million a year, up from $700 million.

The expanded tax incentive program allocates $100 million for independent studios and gives additional incentives to companies that produce two or more projects in New York and commit to at least $100 million in qualified spending.

The program was also extended through 2036, which could help attract TV producers, who often want to know that their filming location is committed if they’re embarking on a series.

Production in New York has been slow, and the state needed this boost, said Michael Hackman, chief executive of Hackman Capital Partners, which owns two film and TV studio properties in the state, as well as several facilities in California. The increase from New York could also push California to increase its own film and TV tax credit program.

Last year, Newsom called to increase the annual amount allocated to California‘s film and TV tax credit program from $330 million to $750 million.

Two bills are currently going through the state legislature that would expand California’s incentive, including increasing the tax credit to cover up to 35% of qualified expenditures (or 40% in areas outside the Greater Los Angeles region), as well as expanding the types of productions that would be eligible for an incentive.

“We have the best infrastructure, the best talent, we have everything going for us,” Hackman said. “So if our state legislature can get more competitive with our tax credits, I think more productions will stay. But if they don’t, this will result in more productions continuing to leave the state and going to New York and to other locations.”

May 12 (UPI) — Three rock climbers were killed over the weekend in a climbing accident in the North Cascade mountains in Washington state, as investigators look into equipment failure.

“A party of four climbers from Renton, Wash., were involved in a fall while descending a steep gully, ” according to a statement Monday from the Okanogan County Sheriff’s Office.

“The presumed cause of the accident is anchor failure while rappelling, with more investigation still ongoing,” the sheriff’s office added.

The four men, who have not been identified, fell nearly 200 feet at around 11:30 a.m. PDT, on Sunday, in the area of North Early Winters Spire off of State Route 20 in the North Cascades.

Three of the climbers, ages 36, 47 and 63, were pronounced dead at the site of the fall. The fourth member of the group survived and hiked back to a car, before driving 60 miles to find a pay phone and call for help.

“There was a long time delay before he got to Newhalem,” said Undersheriff David Yarnell of the Okanogan County Sheriff’s Office.

The climber was taken to Harborview Medical Center in Seattle, where his condition is unknown. According to Yarnell, he walked out not knowing “he had as significant of internal injuries as he did.”

Yarnell blamed equipment failure for the fall, saying that all four climbers were tied to the same anchor point, which is “not preferred.”

“Investigators will try to determine whether the climbers were using a pre-existing anchor point, or their own gear … All we know is that the anchor point that they were all tied off to failed,” he said.

The Snohomish County Helicopter Rescue Team was able to retrieve the remains of the three climbers killed in the “technical, mountainous terrain.”

“Our thoughts are with the family members and friends of those involved.”

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Freshman Moni Nikolov posted six kills, four aces and a pair of digs and Long Beach State beat UCLA 25-17, 25-23 and 25-21 to win the NCAA men’s volleyball tournament Monday night.

It was the Beach’s (30-3) fourth championship in program history and first since 2019. Long Beach State also won the title in 2018 and claimed its first title in 1991 when current coach Alan Knipe was a player.

The 6-foot-10 Nikolov, who just turned 18, started the match with an opening-serve ace and ended UCLA’s two-time reign with a thunderous kill.

“Not for one second did we think we were going to lose that game,” Nikolov said. “Before the game in the locker room we told each other we were here. We were born for this …. game.

“Even when we were down five, we trusted each other because we knew we were the better team.”

Trailing 1-0, UCLA led 18-13 in the second set before the nation’s No. 1-ranked team outscored the Bruins 12-5 for a two-point win. In the third set, Alex Kandev’s kill gave Long Beach State a 4-3 lead and the Beach led for the remainder. Kandev finished with a .452 hitting percentage.

The Bruins entered the tournament with the second-highest hitting efficiency in the country but were stifled in part by Long Beach State’s length and were outhit by the Beach .354 to .192. UCLA’s Cooper Robinson finished with a .381 hitting percentage.

The championship match was the third meeting between the two teams this season with Long Beach State owning a 9-1 set advantage.

Long Beach State dropped just a single set as it beat Fort Valley State 3-0 and Pepperdine 3-1.

Two-time defending champion UCLA (22-7) sought to become college volleyball’s first three-peat champion since the Bruins won four in a row from 1981 to 1984.