logo
Is California capable of prying loose Trump's grip on the nation? The fate of this bill will tell us

Is California capable of prying loose Trump's grip on the nation? The fate of this bill will tell us

Following resounding losses by Democrats in the November election, party leaders such as Gov. Gavin Newsom have sought to align themselves with the burgeoning 'abundance' movement, which contends that blue states will only win back voters if they can prove their ability to govern effectively — including by providing access to basic goods, such as high-quality public education and widely available housing.
How's that effort going in California?
In short — not well.
If you pay attention to California politics, you likely heard about the death this week of SB677, a bill to make it easier to split single-family-home lots for duplexes or fourplexes, and the near killing of SB79, which would allow multifamily housing up to seven stories near major transit stops — both from state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco.
The bills' primary assailant was state Sen. Aisha Wahab, D-Fremont, chair of the Senate Housing Committee, who has leaned on the tired refrain that efforts to streamline new housing production are 'giveaways for developers,' partly because they reduce the ability of local governments to weigh in on projects.
Wahab's insistence on fighting for California's failed status quo on housing, even as American democracy sinks around us, rightly drew outrage.
But for an even bleaker example of how state leaders are failing to rise to the urgency of the moment, Californians should consider the response to AB1121 from Assembly Member Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park (Los Angeles County).
The seemingly uncontroversial bill would require California teachers in transitional kindergarten through fifth grade to be trained in the 'science of reading,' which emphasizes the importance of foundational literacy skills, including phonics — or sounding out words. It would also require schools to adopt an evidence-based reading curriculum in transitional kindergarten through eighth grade. Backed by decades of interdisciplinary research, this approach has proven to be particularly effective in teaching young kids how to read — regardless of their mother language.
California schools and teachers currently have a fair amount of leeway in the curriculum they use, and the state doesn't track those materials or how effective they are. But a review of more than 300 of the state's largest school districts conducted by the California Reading Coalition found that fewer than 2% use programs aligned with the science of reading.
The results speak for themselves.
Nearly 60% of our third graders didn't meet state standards for English language arts and literacy in the 2023-24 school year. Meanwhile, poverty-stricken red states such as Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama have surged ahead of California in childhood literacy after adopting mandatory foundational literacy teaching and training.
That California childhood literacy rates have fallen significantly beneath those of the poorest state in the nation should be considered a stain on the progressive values this state claims to stand for.
Yet last year, California Democrats silently killed a bipartisan bill to mandate the science of reading, refusing to even discuss the topic publicly. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, and Assembly Member Al Muratsuchi, D-Rolling Hills Estates (Los Angeles County), who leads the Assembly Education Committee (and is running for state superintendent of public instruction next year) tabled the bill without a hearing amid fierce opposition from influential interest groups — including the California Teachers Association and Californians Together, which advocates for English language learners.
Yes, you read that correctly — ensuring California kids receive the most effective reading lessons didn't even merit a discussion among Democrats in the face of union opposition.
Rubio's bill faced similar hurdles this year.
Most enraging is that the state's English language arts framework already underscores that foundational reading skills 'should be given high priority' among other strategies in early literacy instruction. State law also requires teacher candidates to demonstrate their fluency in evidence-based foundational reading methods to receive their credential.
Meanwhile, literacy rates at some of California's lowest-performing schools improved significantly after adopting this curriculum.
So what's behind the reluctance to implement this approach more widely?
Martha Hernandez, executive director of Californians Together, told the editorial board that Rubio's bill was too narrowly focused on foundational skills and didn't take into account the needs of English language learners. But nothing in Rubio's bill precludes teachers from incorporating other reading strategies and approaches — it merely codifies the state's existing stance, which is that foundational skills should be prioritized.
Meanwhile, Leslie Littman, vice president of the California Teachers Association, argued the bill would weaken local control over education. 'Teacher input, teacher voice, in the decision-making process with the curriculum and the development of that are vitally important,' she said. Littman also said the bill doesn't come with funding — though Rubio told the editorial board there's money for curriculum development and teacher training in Newsom's proposed budget.
In short, the arguments against AB1121 are nonsensical.
'These are children's lives,' Rubio, a longtime elementary school teacher who was herself an English language learner, said. 'If they miss something in their educational career, it does affect them for the rest of their life.'
That lawmakers have been wrangling for years over whether to even consider such a common-sense bill is absurd.
How can California Democrats say with a straight face they're governing responsibly when kids here are being outperformed by students in far poorer school districts in the Deep South? How long will they continue to use abstract ideological concepts like local control to protect policies that clearly aren't working?
On the Thursday legislative deadline for education-related bills to be scheduled for a hearing, Rubio's bill still hadn't been put on the calendar for the Assembly Education Committee. But, at the last minute, a deal was struck with Assembly leadership for a compromise bill — the details of which haven't yet been made public.
It's comical that a compromise was necessary for such a critically important bill to even stand a chance of passing through the California Legislature.
What, exactly, is politically challenging about ensuring that our youngest kids learn to read? Isn't California ranking far below Mississippi for early childhood literacy not enough of a wake-up call?
Mississippi, incidentally, also had the lowest rate of homelessness in the United States in 2023. It's a sad day when struggling families who want to stay housed and ensure their kids learn to read have a better shot in the dark-red Deep South than they do in California.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Freshman wishlist: Adam Schiff vs. Trump 2.0
Freshman wishlist: Adam Schiff vs. Trump 2.0

Axios

time27 minutes ago

  • Axios

Freshman wishlist: Adam Schiff vs. Trump 2.0

Sen. Adam Schiff has some advice for President Trump when attempting to demean him: Pick one nickname. Why it matters: Schiff rose to cable TV stardom as an anti-Trump foil while leading the first impeachment. "Shifty Schiff" or "Watermelon Head" learned to give as good as he got. Trump called Schiff names. Schiff ensured he was impeached — twice. "[T]he cardinal rule of nicknames is: Just stick with one," Schiff told Axios in an interview. Schiff translated his MAGA notoriety into a safe Senate seat, first battling through a tough, expensive primary. Now he's ready for round two with Trump. "I've been thrust back into a lot of that responsibility again because what he's trying to do in the second term is even worse than what he tried to do in the first term," Schiff said. Zoom out: Before Trump dominated the national conversation, Schiff considered himself a fairly nonpartisan national security expert. He endorsed Jim Mattis for Secretary of Defense in 2016 when other Democrats didn't. Schiff had hoped for another rebrand in the Senate. "I was expecting a Biden or a Harris presidency, and the ability to just focus exclusively on what positive things I could get done," he told Axios. What to watch: He is enjoying visiting redder areas of the state after spending years representing just a slice of heavily Democratic Los Angeles. He shared about one such visit in the state's northeast. "I knew I had made progress when one of the farmers looked at me and said, 'I don't know why he calls you watermelon head. You have a perfectly normal-sized head.'" But it's doubtful he'll revert back to a less partisan posture, given the direction of Trump's second term. Driving the news: Two days after our interview, Trump deployed National Guard troops to tamp down on ICE protests in Los Angeles in opposition to Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.). "This action is designed to inflame tensions, sow chaos, and escalate the situation," Schiff posted on X on Saturday. He also repeatedly called for violence to stop at protests. "Assaulting law enforcement is never ok," he posted Sunday. Zoom in: Schiff tried to pass a resolution shortly before our interview to stop the administration from stripping civil rights leader Harvey Milk's name from a Navy ship. He has demanded financial disclosures from the White House, written letters to stop DOGE from shutting down USDA offices and tried to block the repeal of EV rules. "Most of my days are spent trying to walk this line between stopping the administration from violating the law and ignoring the Constitution on the one hand," Schiff said, "and continuing to deliver for Californians..." Schiff recognizes that his clashes altered his career trajectory. "I have my brand pre-Trump and my brand post-Trump," Schiff told Axios. Between the lines: Schiff's leadership in the House's first Trump impeachment made him a mortal enemy to Trump and his allies, leading to a "weirdly personal" dynamic, Schiff said.

Democrats target farmers on Trump's DOGE cuts
Democrats target farmers on Trump's DOGE cuts

Axios

time27 minutes ago

  • Axios

Democrats target farmers on Trump's DOGE cuts

Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) will hold a "shadow hearing" Thursday to draw a direct link between President Trump's plans to cut foreign assistance and the farmers that sell their crops to the programs. Why it matters: Democrats are looking for ways to make Trump's DOGE and budget plans uncomfortable for farm state Republicans and want to appeal directly to their constituents. The Trump administration has called for deep spending reductions for international food programs run by the United States Agency for International Development and the Department of Agriculture. Those programs buy agricultural products from U.S. farmers to the tune of $2 billion a year, according to Shaheen. Some farm state Republicans have questioned administration st officials about programs like Food for Peace. Zoom out: Democrats are trying to broaden their case against the Trump administration's budget, which will receive its first official vote this week, when the House brings up Trump's rescissions package, which cuts funding for NPR, PBS and USAID. Zoom in: On Thursday, Shaheen, the ranking member on the foreign relations committee, and Klobuchar, the ranking member of the agriculture subcommittee on nutrition and forestry will host a group of experts to detail the effect of the cuts to foreign aid on U.S. farmers.

Trump vows to "HIT" any protester who spits on police. He pardoned those who did far worse on Jan. 6
Trump vows to "HIT" any protester who spits on police. He pardoned those who did far worse on Jan. 6

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump vows to "HIT" any protester who spits on police. He pardoned those who did far worse on Jan. 6

In one of his first acts of his second term as president, Donald Trumppardoned hundreds of people who attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to try to keep him in office, including those who beat police officers. On Monday, Trump posted a warning on social media to those demonstrating in Los Angeles against his immigration crackdown and confronting police and members of the National Guard he had deployed: 'IF THEY SPIT, WE WILL HIT, and I promise you they will be hit harder than they have ever been hit before. Such disrespect will not be tolerated!' The discrepancy of Trump's response to the two disturbances — pardoning rioters who beat police on Jan. 6, which he called 'a beautiful day,' while condemning violence against law enforcement in Los Angeles — illustrates how the president expects his enemies to be held to different standards than his supporters. 'Trump's behavior makes clear that he only values the rule of law and the people who enforce it when it's to his political advantage,' said Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Dartmouth College. Trump pardoned more than 1,000 people who tried to halt the transfer of power on that day in 2021, when about 140 officers were injured. The former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Matthew Graves, called it 'likely the largest single day mass assault of law enforcement ' in American history. Trump's pardon covered people convicted of attacking police with flagpoles, a hockey stick and a crutch. Many of the assaults were captured on surveillance or body camera footage that showed rioters engaging in hand-to-hand combat with police as officers desperately fought to beat back the angry crowd. While some who were pardoned were convicted of nonviolent crimes, Trump pardoned at least 276 defendants who were convicted of assault charges, according to an Associated Press review of court records. Nearly 300 others had their pending charges dismissed as a result of Trump's sweeping act of clemency. Roughly 180 of the defendants were charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding law enforcement or obstructing officers during a civil disorder. 'They were extremely violent, and they have been treated as if their crimes were nothing, and now the president is trying to use the perception of violence by some protesters as an excuse to crack some heads,' said Mike Romano, who was a deputy chief of the section of the U.S. Attorney's office that prosecuted those involved in the Capitol siege. A White House spokesman, Harrison Fields, defended the president's response: 'President Trump was elected to secure the border, equip federal officials with the tools to execute this plan, and restore law and order.' Trump has long planned to use civil unrest as an opportunity to invoke broad presidential powers, and he seemed poised to do just that on Monday as he activated a battalion of U.S. Marines to support the presence of the National Guard. He mobilized the Guard on Saturday over the opposition of California's governor, Gavin Newsom, and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats. The Guard was last sent to Los Angeles by a president during the Rodney King riots in 1992, when President George H.W. Bush invoked the Insurrection Act. Those riots were significantly more violent and widespread than the current protests in Los Angeles, which were largely confined to a stretch of downtown, a relatively small patch in a city of 469 square miles and nearly 4 million people. The current demonstrations were sparked by a confrontation Saturday in the city of Paramount, southeast of downtown Los Angeles, where federal agents were staging at a Department of Homeland Security office. California officials, who are largely Democrats, argued that Trump is trying to create more chaos to expand his power. Newsom, whom Trump suggested should be arrested, called the president's acts 'authoritarian.' But even Rick Caruso, a prominent Los Angeles Republican and former mayoral candidate, posted on the social media site X that the president should not have called in the National Guard. Protests escalated after the Guard arrived, with demonstrators blockading a downtown freeway. Some some set multiple self-driving cars on fire and pelted Los Angeles police with debris and fireworks. Romano said he worried that Trump's double standard on how demonstrators should treat law enforcement will weaken the position of police in American society. He recalled that, during the Capitol attack, many rioters thought police should let them into the building because they had supported law enforcement's crackdown on anti-police demonstrations after George Floyd was murdered in 2020. That sort of 'transactional' approach Trump advocates is toxic, Romano said. 'We need to expect law enforcement are doing their jobs properly,' he said. Believing they just cater to the president 'is going to undermine public trust in law enforcement.' ___ Associated Press writers Michael Kunzleman and Alanna Durkin Richer in Washington contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store