Inside California Politics: March 22, 2025
(INSIDE CALIFORNIA POLITICS) — This week on Inside California Politics, former California GOP chair Jessica Millan Patterson spoke with Inside California Politics about her party's growing strength in the Democrat-controlled state.
Political reporter Eytan Wallace goes in-depth on the state's Medi-Cal funding issues and Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara plans to ease the California insurance crisis.
Political strategists Ed Emerson and Tim Rosales analyze the California GOP's plans to target certain seats in 2026 and former Rep. Katie Porter's decision to join the California governor's race.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The White House Wants the Megabill by July 4. For Real.
House and Senate Republicans spent Thursday at each other's throats over President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' The sparring between the two chambers reached a point where members were openly scoffing at the GOP's self-imposed July 4 deadline for passing the bill. Down Pennsylvania Avenue, meanwhile, the White House isn't sweating. In fact, Trump's aides are downright bullish about getting the megabill wrapped up in a bow for a presidential signature by Independence Day. 'We are targeting the week of July 4 for final passage,' said one of two Trump administration officials I spoke to Wednesday and granted anonymity to candidly describe the private talks. Let's be clear: The timeline is extraordinarily fast. Not only does Senate Majority Leader John Thune have to find a way to bridge competing demands inside his conference and weather a grueling amendment 'vote-a-rama,' but he also has to work with Speaker Mike Johnson, who is already groaning at every change being entertained for the bill that barely passed his chamber last month. Traditionally, getting the two chambers aligned on a single piece of complicated legislation means weeks of 'conferencing' — that's what happened in 2017, the last time Republicans pursued a party-line tax bill. This time, the legislation is even more complicated and the margins even thinner. But White House officials are adamant that GOP leaders skip that step. Nor do they want the House making more changes after the Senate, requiring another 'pingpong' back across the Rotunda. They expect the Senate to clear a bill that the House can simply plop on the floor, pass and send to Trump's desk. 'There's not going to be a pingpong or a conference,' the official told me yesterday. Can they really do that in just three weeks? Some Republicans are skeptical, to say the least. Sen. John Curtis of Utah said 'a lot of us would be surprised' if the July 4 deadline holds at the POLITICO Energy Summit Tuesday. And during a Punchbowl News event Wednesday, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas said that while the Senate might be able to finish on time, it could take another month to negotiate with the House. 'The Senate is going to do what it damn well wants to do,' he said. OK, senator: Go tell that to Donald Trump. Some of the president's allies on the Hill are already dreaming up a snazzy Rose Garden celebration to ring in both Independence Day and the enactment of the 'big, beautiful bill.' (At least that's what one well-placed GOP congressional aide predicted to me this week.) The recent history of the megabill is fueling the administration's confidence. Political prognosticators scoffed at Johnson's self-imposed Memorial Day target for House passage, predicting the warring factions in his conference would make that deadline an impossibility. But Trump swooped in and muscled the bill through by sheer force, strong-arming moderate holdouts and bringing conservatives to heel. And White House officials are sure he can do it again. Administration aides are well aware of the work left to be done. Senate Republicans are already moving to throw a major wrench in the negotiations by upending two key provisions that were essential to winning the support of rival blocs in the House. Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo told his colleagues Wednesday he plans to deliver on a personal priority that's highly desired by members of his panel: making key business tax breaks permanent. To do it, he's ready to scale back the House's $40,000 cap on the state-and-local-tax deduction — a key factor in winning the support of blue-state GOP holdouts. And to manage desires elsewhere in the Senate GOP, Crapo also hinted he'll elongate the phase-out time for some clean-energy tax breaks enacted under former President Joe Biden — a huge no-no for House Freedom Caucus members, who made their quick repeal a must in exchange for their votes. That means Trump is about to find himself in a familiar spot — playing referee between the chambers — and his team knows it. He could start blowing the whistle as soon as Thursday, when he meets with Thune and Crapo at the White House. There's good reason to think that Trump will ultimately be able to impose his will on the unruly GOP lawmakers. There were signs he was already doing so this week, after rumblings emerged about some Senate Republicans wanting to scale back Trump's tax priorities in order to pay for the business tax provisions. Trump's campaign pledges to exempt tips, overtime pay and Social Security from income taxes made it into the House bill at a cost of $230 billion, according to a Joint Committee on Taxation score. Scrapping or scaling back any of those provisions could have been a huge boon to Senate tax writers. But the White House made clear behind the scenes that would be a no-go: 'We're not willing to entertain any scaling back of our signature promises,' a second Trump administration official said. 'You're not going to rock the president's commitments to the voters to pay for [business] expensing in the out years.' On Tuesday, Thune made it clear to reporters that Trump's priorities would stay — words the White House welcomed. So don't expect much stomach inside the GOP for bucking Trump's wishes over the coming weeks. It's telling that, as I was told, none of the Senate Finance Republicans who met with Trump last week raised the issue of shrinking his tax wish list during their White House skull session. That just underscores how no one — not even senators who get six-year terms and have historically relished their independence — wants to tell the most powerful man in the world: Please, Mr. President, we'd like to water down your campaign promises to substitute one of our own. 'I think ultimately a lot of members are wish-casting different structures to permit more of their own priorities, and certainly that's something that senators are welcome to do,' the first official said. But 'the president's priorities are not negotiable in this process.'
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court declines to hear GOP request to review Pa. provisional ballot ruling
A GOP challenge to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's ruling on provisional ballots is dead after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case. The high court's rejection June 6 means county boards of elections must count provisional ballots cast by voters who find out their mail-in ballots have been rejected under the state Supreme Court's decision in October. The case at issue, Faith Genser et al vs. the Butler County Board of Elections, stemmed from a lawsuit filed after the 2024 primary election by two Butler County voters. They claimed they were disenfranchised when the board refused to count provisional ballots the voters cast on Election Day, after learning their mail ballots were disqualified for missing dates. Pa. politics: Erie County Democrats have slimmest voter registration edge in decades The board of elections reasoned the Pennsylvania Election Code says provisional ballots from voters whose mail-in ballots are 'timely received' can't be counted, even if the voters' mail-in ballots are rejected. In its 4-3 decision, the state Supreme Court found the Elections Code requires county elections officials to count provisional ballots if no other ballot is attributable to the voter, and as long as there are no other issues that would disqualify their provisional ballot. The U.S. Supreme Court did not explain its decision not to hear the appeal. Attorneys for the RNC and Republican Party of Pennsylvania did not respond to an email requesting comment. 'Republicans don't think every rightful vote should count. We disagree, and now, the Supreme Court has sided with us. Pennsylvanians deserve to have their say in every election ― full stop,' Democratic National Committee Chairperson Ken Martin said in a statement. The case is one of many involving 'paperwork errors' on vote-by-mail-ballots, since absentee voting without an excuse became an option in 2019 with the passage of Act 77. 'Every election, thousands of Pennsylvania mail ballots are voided due to common technical mistakes made by voters,' Rich Ting, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Pennsylvania, said. 'Thanks to Faith Genser and Frank Matis fighting for their right to vote, all Pennsylvania voters who make those mistakes are guaranteed the right to vote by provisional ballot as a failsafe.' The ACLU of Pennsylvania and the Public Interest Law Center with pro-bono counsel from Dechert LLP represented Genser and Matis in their lawsuit. 'The Supreme Court's determination not to hear this case means that Pennsylvanians who make a technical mistake with their mail-in ballots will have a way to fix the mistake instead of losing the opportunity to vote,' Ben Geffen, senior attorney at the Public Interest Law Center, said. In its petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, the GOP argued the state Supreme Court usurped the Pennsylvania Legislature's authority to set the 'times, places and manner' for congressional elections, leaning on a premise known as the 'independent state legislature theory.' That theory asserts that the U.S. Constitution reserves the authority to set the times, places and manner of elections exclusively for state legislatures. In opposition, the DNC and Pennsylvania Democratic Party asserted that the U.S. Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction, because the case falls outside the limited circumstances in which it can review the judgment of a state's highest court. Such appeals are allowed only when a federal law is in question, a state law is claimed to conflict with federal law or 'where any title, right, privilege, or immunity is specially set up or claimed under the Constitution.' The June 6 decision is the second time the U.S. Supreme Court has passed on reviewing the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision. In November it refused to place a stay on enforcement of the ruling days before the presidential election. The Pennsylvania General Assembly has taken steps to pass amendments to clarify the vote-by-mail law in recent weeks. House Bill 1396, sponsored by Speaker Joanna McClinton, D-Philadelphia, would give election workers up to a week before Election Day to prepare to count mail-in ballots, a process that has been a bottleneck for election results in parts of the state, and has provided fodder for election deniers. The measure would remedy other ambiguities in Act 77, such as making clear that county election officials must notify voters if their mail ballots are rejected. It passed the House with a 102-101 vote along party lines May 13. Peter Hall has been a journalist in Pennsylvania and New Jersey for more than 20 years, most recently covering criminal justice and legal affairs for The Morning Call in Allentown. Pennsylvania Capital-Star is part of States Newsroom, the nation's largest state-focused nonprofit news organization. This article originally appeared on Erie Times-News: Supreme Court won't hear GOP challenge to PA provisional ballot ruling
Newsweek
44 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Full List of Lawmakers Who Traded Stocks After Trump's Tariffs Announcement
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. In the days that followed President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" announcements, the climax of his second-term trade policy, lawmakers reported hundreds of stock trades. Newsweek has compiled a ranking of trades made by members of Congress between April 3, the day after President Trump unveiled reciprocal tariffs on dozens of trading partners, and when these were paused on April 9. Why It Matters The imposition and subsequent reversal of the president's sweeping tariff policies resulted in significant stock market volatility, with indexes crashing following the announcement and those who purchased in the interim benefitting from a boost when these were placed on hold. The high number of trades made by lawmakers during this period has again raised questions about the ethics of congressional stock trading. Rob Bresnahan speaks at a campaign rally for Donald Trump at the Mohegan Sun Arena at Casey Plaza, Aug. 17, 2024, in Wilkes-Barre, Pa. President Donald Trump speaks during a 'Make America Wealthy Again' trade... Rob Bresnahan speaks at a campaign rally for Donald Trump at the Mohegan Sun Arena at Casey Plaza, Aug. 17, 2024, in Wilkes-Barre, Pa. President Donald Trump speaks during a 'Make America Wealthy Again' trade announcement event in the Rose Garden at the White House on April 2, 2025 in Washington, DC. Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., speaks to the media on Capitol Hill in Washington, Dec. 21, 2020. More Carolyn Kaster / Chip Somodevilla / Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo / Getty Images / AP Photo Members of Congress are permitted to buy and sell stocks, provided they disclose these within 30 days of the transaction, per the 2012 Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act. However, many lawmakers, including some of those in the list below, have advocated that lawmakers be banned from stock trading altogether, given the insider knowledge they may have of market-moving events, as well as the concerns this could raise among citizens' regarding possible conflicts of interest. Surveys have also shown that overwhelming bipartisan majorities are in favor of banning stock trading by members of Congress. Which Lawmakers Made Trades After Liberation Day? Below is a list of trades made by U.S. lawmakers between April 3 and April 9, based on publicly available disclosures tracked by The list includes both sales and purchases during this time and is ranked according to the total number. Representative Rob Bresnahan, Republican, Pennsylvania Total trades: 182 Representative Josh Gottheimer, Democrat, New Jersey Total trades: 87 Representative Jefferson Shreve, Republican, Indiana Total trades: 57 Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican, Georgia Total trades: 42 Representative Julie Johnson, Democrat, Texas Total trades: 31 Representative Jared Moskowitz, Democrat, Florida Total trades: 25 Senator Markwayne Mullin, Republican, Oklahoma Total trades: 20 Representative Michael McCaul, Republican, Texas Total trades: 18 Senator John Boozman, Republican, Arkansas Total trades: 14 Representative Dwight Evans, Democrat, Pennsylvania Total trades: 13 Representative April Delaney, Democrat, Maryland Total trades: 10 Representative Bruce Westerman, Republican, Arkansas Total trades: 7 Senator Dave McCormick, Republican, Pennsylvania Total trades: 6 Representative Tony Wied, Republican, Wisconsin Total trades: 5 Senator Ashley Moody, Republican, Florida Total trades: 4 Representative Gilbert Cisneros, Democrat, California Total trades: 3 Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat, Rhode Island Total trades: 2 Representative Mike Collins, Republican, Georgia Total trades: 2 Representative Kevin Hern, Republican, Oklahoma Total trades: 2 Representative Rick Larsen, Democrat, Washington Total trades: 2 Representative Vicente Gonzalez, Democrat, Texas Total trades: 2 Representative Gilbert Cisneros, Democrat, California Total trades: 1 Representative Victoria Spartz, Republican, Indiana Total trades: 1 Representative Max Miller, Republican, Ohio Total trades: 1 Representative Donald Sternoff Beyer, Democrat, Virginia Total trades: 1 Despite being the two most prolific traders on this list, Pennsylvania Republican Bresnahan and New Jersey Democrat Josh Gottheimer have both in the past advocated for regulations on congressional stock trading. In 2024, Bresnahan penned an article in the Pottsville Republican Herald in which he said he would "happily co-sponsor" bipartisan legislation aimed at banning congressional stock trading. In May, following a report on his stock trades in the New York Times, Bresnahan introduced a bill entitled the Transparency in Representation through Uniform Stock Trading Ban Act, which would go into effect in 2027 and require lawmakers to place certain assets into a blind trust, an arrangement in which assets are transferred to and managed by a third party without the individual's knowledge or control. Bresnahan said he would work to move his own personal assets into a blind trust in a May 6 press release. Gottheimer told CNBC in 2022 that he didn't believe members of Congress should not be "be directly involved in trading," and instead said hand control of their investments over to a blind trust, later cosponsoring legislation to this end. Gottheimer said that his own investments were managed by an outside party, adding: "I think that's the way it should be: Hands off, third-party, no decision-making from a member of Congress." Newsweek has reached out to the offices of Representatives Bresnahan and Gottheimer via phone for comment. What People Are Saying Republican Representative Mike Lawler, in response to a chart showing the gains made by a stock purchased by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, wrote: "Just another reason why stock trading by members of Congress or their spouses should be banned. The appearance of impropriety, or worse, is too great." Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff, in a statement following the introduction of the Ban Congressional Stock Trading Act, said: "Members of Congress should not be playing the stock market while we make Federal policy and have extraordinary access to confidential information. Stock trading by members of Congress massively erodes public confidence in Congress and creates a serious appearance of impropriety, which is why we should ban stock trading by members of Congress altogether." What Happens Next? President Trump's Liberation Day tariffs are still subject to the 90-day pause announced on April 9, which will expire in early July. The administration has said that this window will allow for comprehensive negotiations with America's main trading partners.
