‘Abundance' movement hits a labor wall in California
For months, Democrats here raved about an ascendant movement to supercharge housing and energy infrastructure, mainlining the buzzy Ezra Klein book, 'Abundance.' Gov. Gavin Newsom, a potential presidential contender, and allies in the Legislature argued that an aggressively pro-building agenda could lift their moribund fortunes by addressing skyrocketing housing prices while proving they are the party of bold action.
But now top Democrats are confronting opposition from unions wary that the rush to ease regulations could undercut hard-fought wage and training standards. The animosity spilled over this week, with proposed new wage minimums for fast-tracked housing projects spurring a backlash from unions and some Democratic legislators.
'Abundance' may be a wonky rallying cry for many California Democrats. But for some of their closest allies, it has become a slur.
'On one hand, we have Gavin trying to sit down with these right-wing podcasters to talk about losing young men, and on the other hand he's putting his name on some bill that reduces the wages of working-class men in California,' California Labor Federation leader Lorena Gonzalez. 'Anyone who thinks this abundance movement is how we're going to get our groove back just hasn't talked to real people.'
Or as state Sen. Dave Cortese, a San Jose Democrat and a staunch labor ally, put it: 'I've been around long enough to know that some of this latest trendy stuff is bullshit.'
Democrats focused on spurring housing development insist they are on labor's side. They've enlisted an influential ally in California's carpenters union, and argue that crushing housing costs — the result of decades of under-building — are burdening the very working men and women unions represent. Democrats still reeling from defeats in 2024 are desperate to win back working-class voters who have fled the party.
'No one wants to actually go against labor — and not because they're powerful, but because we stand with labor,' said Matt Lewis, communications director for California YIMBY, an influential pro-development advocacy group. 'We don't want to undermine labor. We want people to have good wages and be able to live in the homes we've built.'
But many union officials are unpersuaded. They recoiled when journalist Josh Barro tolda gathering of centrist Democrats last month that when he examined policies that 'stand in the way of abundance,' he'd often 'find a labor union,' following up with a post entitled, 'In Blue Cities, Abundance Will Require Fighting Labor Unions.'
Barro does not speak for the nebulous abundance movement. But the kind of sentiment he expressed does little to disabuse progressives and union members of their belief that it is a Trojan Horse for the kinds of big-donor-friendly policies that have unmoored Democrats from their onetime base. The wage proposal in Sacramento this week offered them more evidence.
'Folks who want to make dramatic changes to the system to benefit their agenda like to repackage them as the new shiny thing,' said Scott Wetch, a longtime labor lobbyist who on Wednesday likened the bill to Jim Crow-era efforts to suppress wages.
Gretchen Newsom, a representative of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, said Democrats should focus on struggling working-class voters.
'Instead,' said Newsom, who is not related to the governor, 'we're doing this abundance theory that is abundantly going to abandon workers.'
It's widely accepted among politicians of both parties in California that building housing and infrastructure takes too long. San Diego County Building and Construction Trades Council leader Carol Kim pointed to unions' efforts to translate Biden-era infrastructure funding into projects and jobs, noting that excessive red tape and delays posed 'the biggest challenge in convincing blue collar workers that Democrats were taking the right steps to help working people.'
'We've been doing that work, so this whole abundance stuff is not new,' Kim said. 'What some of us in labor right now are worried about is that it's absolutely being glommed onto by the bad actors, the people who use these types of exceptions to undermine job quality standards or fatten their own pockets.'
In some ways, 'abundance' applies a new name to an old idea. Long before Klein's book with Derek Thompson was published, California Democrats — particularly in sapphire-blue San Francisco — had rallied around an agenda that faulted excessive regulation and protracted environmental reviews for stalling needed housing, driving up costs. Bills to speed up that process have repeatedly run into opposition from construction unions who warn of eroded labor standards.
But this year the philosophy became inescapable. Legislative leaders met in San Francisco with Klein, who had already forged ties with housing-focused Bay Area elected Democrats. Newsom hosted Klein on his podcast, where the governor said 'abundance is fundamentally, foundationally who we are' and boasted about his administration forcing San Francisco to proceed with a contested housing project.
'You've got an ideological war that's going on in progressive cities,' Newsom told Klein. 'They don't believe in the supply-demand framework. They don't believe in this notion of abundance. Fundamentally, they don't have a growth mindset.'
Weeks later, Newsom transformed California's housing debate by sweeping ambitious housing bills into his state budget proposal, putting more pressure on Democratic lawmakers to approve them. The maneuver thrilled abundance-aligned allies whose agenda was now being advanced at the highest echelons of political power.
'The Legislature has a chance to deliver the most significant housing and infrastructure reforms in decades,' Newsom's press office posted on X this week. 'This is our moment to build the California Dream for a new generation.'
But Newsom also set up a showdown by making a budget deal contingent on passage of housing legislation. Labor and environmental groups condemned the wage proposal in extraordinarily acrimonious hearings where legislative Democrats echoed concerns about alienating allies.
'To ask the legislature to, in a very sweeping manner in the name of abundance or something ... take down years and years of thoughtful labor standards,' Cortese said, 'should be shocking to people.'
Facing enormous pressure, lawmakers on Thursday pulled the minimum-wage bill in a compromise that reverted to existing labor standards, although the proposal could still resurface. Accompanying streamlining legislation was expected to be pared back during negotiations. Those shifts vindicated labor foes and underscored the volatile politics at play.
'The governor has historically pushed the boundaries and tested some creative policies,' said Joseph Cruz, executive director of the California State Council of Laborers. 'We have to make it easier to build in California, and I don't think anyone disputes that. But at what expense to workers?'
Eric He contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Los Angeles Times
a few seconds ago
- Los Angeles Times
California Republicans push Democrats on transparency, timeline for redistricting
SACRAMENTO — California's push to redraw the state's congressional districts to favor Democrats faced early opposition Tuesday during legislative hearings, a preview of the obstacles ahead for Gov. Gavin Newsom and his allies as they try to convince voters to back the effort. California Democrats entered the redistricting fray after Republicans in Texas moved to reconfigure their political districts to increase by five the number of GOP members of Congress after the 2026 midterm elections, a move that could sway the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections. The proposed map of new districts in California that could go before voters in November could cost as many as five Golden State Republicans their seats in Congress. In Sacramento, Republicans criticized Democrats for trying to scrap the independent redistricting process approved by voters in 2010, a change designed to remove self-serving politics and partisan game-playing. GOP lawmakers argued that the public and legislators had little time to review the maps of the proposed congressional districts and questioned who crafted the new districts and bankrolled the effort. In an attempt to slow down the push by Democrats, California Republicans filed an emergency petition at the California Supreme Court, arguing that Democrats violated the state Constitution by rushing the bills through the legislature. The state Constitution requires lawmakers to introduce non-budget bills 30 days before they are voted on, unless the Legislature waives that rule by a three-fourths majority vote. The bills were introduced Monday through a common process known as 'gut and amend,' where lawmakers strip out the language from an older pending bill and replace it with a new proposal. The lawsuit said that without the Supreme Court's intervention, the state could enact 'significant new legislation that the public has only seen for, at most, a few days,' according to the lawsuit filed by GOP state Sens. Tony Strickland of Huntington Beach and Suzette Martinez Valladares of Acton and Assemblymembers Tri Ta of Westminster and Kathryn Sanchez of Trabuco Canyon. Democrats bristled at the questions about their actions, including grilling by reporters and Republicans about who had drawn the proposed congressional districts that the party wants to put before voters. 'When I go to a restaurant, I don't need to meet the chef,' said Assembly Elections Committee chair Gail Pellerin (D-Santa Cruz). Democrats unveiled their campaign to suspend the independent redistricting commission's work Thursday, proposed maps of the redrawn districts were submitted to state legislative leaders Friday, and the three bills were introduced in the legislature Monday. If passed by a two-thirds vote in both bodies of the legislature and signed by Newsom this week, as expected, the measure will be on the ballot on Nov. 4. On Tuesday, lawmakers listened to hours of testimony and debate, frequently engaging in testy exchanges. After heated arguing and interrupting during an Assembly Elections Committee hearing, Pellerin admonished Assemblymembers Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) and David Tangipa (R-Clovis). 'I would like you both to give me a little time and respect,' Pellerin said near the end of a hearing that lasted about five hours. Tangipa and the committee's vice chair, Assemblywoman Alexandra Macedo (R-Tulare), repeatedly questioned witnesses about issues that the GOP is likely to continue to raise: the speed with which the legislation is being pushed through, the cost of the special election, the limited opportunity for public comment on the maps, who drew the proposed new districts and who is funding the effort. Tangipa voiced concerns that legislators had too little time to review the legislation. 'That's insanity, and that's heartbreaking to the rest of Californians,' Tangipa said. 'How can you say you actually care about the people of California? Berman dismissed the criticism, saying the bill was five pages long. In a Senate elections committee hearing, State Sen. Steve Choi (R-Irvine), the only Republican on the panel, repeatedly pressed Democrats about how the maps had been drawn before they were presented. Tom Willis, Newsom's campaign counsel who appeared as a witness to support the redistricting bills, said the map was 'publicly submitted, and then the legislature reviewed it carefully and made sure that it was legally compliant.' But, Choi asked, who drew the maps in the first place? Willis said he couldn't answer, because he 'wasn't a part of that process.' In response to questions about why California should change their independent redistricting ethos to respond to potential moves by Texas, state Sen. Majority Leader Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach) was blunt. 'This is a partisan gerrymander,' she said, to counter the impacts of Trump administration policy decisions, from healthcare cuts to immigration raids, that are disproportionately impacting Californians. 'That's what we're talking about here.' Her comments prompted a GOP operative who is aiding the opposition campaign to the ballot measure to say, 'It made me salivate.' California Common Cause, an ardent supporter of independent redistricting, initially signaled openness to revisiting the state's independent redistricting rules because they would not 'call for unilateral political disarmament in the face of authoritarianism.' But on Tuesday, the group announced its opposition to a state Senate bill. 'it would create significant rollbacks in voter protections,' the group said in a statement, arguing that the legislation would result in reduced in-person voting, less opportunities for underrepresented communities to cast ballots and dampens opportunities for public input. 'These changes to the Elections Code ... would hinder full voter participation, with likely disproportionate harm falling to already underrepresented Californians.'


Los Angeles Times
a few seconds ago
- Los Angeles Times
Newsom says California needs to build a water tunnel. Opponents argue costs are too high
As Gov. Gavin Newsom pushes for building a giant water tunnel beneath the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, his administration is saying it's the 'single most effective' way for California to provide enough water as the warming climate brings deeper droughts and more intense storms. Environmental advocates and political leaders in the Delta, among other opponents, condemned a new state analysis that draws that conclusion, arguing that building the tunnel would harm the environment and several types of fish and would push water rates much higher for millions of Californians. The potential costs of building the 45-mile tunnel are generating heated debate. The state has estimated the project, if water agencies participate and contribute, would cost $20.1 billion. But in a separate analysis, economic research firm ECOnorthwest found the costs would probably range from about $60 billion to $100 billion or even more. 'Unfortunately, the Newsom administration is brushing over and leaving out the real costs of the tunnel, both to the ratepayers and taxpayers and the environment,' said Carolee Krieger, executive director of the California Water Impact Network, a nonprofit group that commissioned the economic analysis. She said the high costs would fall largely on people in Southern California through their water bills, and that there are better and more economical ways of securing water supplies for the region. The Newsom administration released the report Tuesday outlining actions it said would 'climate-proof' the state water system so that it can operate for generations in hotter, drier conditions. Department of Water Resources Director Karla Nemeth wrote that the State Water Project — the system of aqueducts, pipelines and pumping plants that delivers supplies from the Delta to farmlands and cities — now 'needs revitalization,' and that 'maintenance of the aging project and a modernized tunnel system to transport water under the Delta are the most valuable adaptations.' The department said in a written statement that the state's 2024 estimate was prepared according to industry standards and that the ECOnorthwest report appears to be based on unsupported assumptions that 'overestimate the cost.' Newsom, who is set to leave office after 2026, has said the tunnel plan, called the Delta Conveyance Project, is essential for the state's future and has made it a central priority. Since May, the governor has sought to fast-track the plan by short-cutting permitting for the project and limiting avenues for legal challenges, saying the effort should not be held back by delays and 'red tape.' But legislators representing areas around the Delta have fought attempts to adopt the governor's plan. The Newsom administration continues to advocate with legislators to accelerate the project, said Tara Gallegos, a spokesperson for the governor. She said in an email that the legislative proposal is 'aimed squarely at removing bureaucratic processes and pointless delays that create unnecessary costs to taxpayers — something Californians have been very loudly and clearly in support of preventing.' Meanwhile, the State Water Resources Control Board is 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 tunnel intakes would be built. The tunnel would create a second route to transport water to the south side of the Delta, where pumps send it into the aqueducts of the State Water Project and onward to cities and farmland. According to the state's plan, the tunnel would be about 36 feet wide on the interior and buried about 140 feet to 170 feet underground. Lawmakers who represent the Delta region criticized the state report as flawed, saying it overlooks the project's costs and their concerns that it would damage the ecosystem and harm communities and farms in the area. In a joint statement, state Sen. Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton) and Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson (D-Suisun City) said the Newsom administration has made false claims about what they view as an 'extremely costly and environmentally destructive project,' and that 'there are far more affordable alternatives to the tunnel project that are much better for the environment, including increasing water recycling and groundwater storage.' Communities in the Delta would be overtaken by extensive construction work for years, they said. Seeking to address those concerns, Newsom earlier this month announced a plan to create a $200 million program to address or minimize or address the effects of construction on local communities. Delta community advocates dismissed that as a hollow attempt to sway some local people, and said they believe the project would be disastrous for local farms and the estuary's struggling fish species, including Chinook salmon and steelhead trout. Some said they see political ambition driving the project. Newsom apparently 'wants to have something for his campaign when he runs for president,' said Brett Baker, a lawyer representing the Central Delta Water Agency and its agricultural landowners, who are challenging the project in court. Baker said the governor seems to be hoping to 'to put his name on it to say he did something. So I think he's become a little bit more desperate.' The project is in an extensive planning stage, and preliminary planning costs are being paid by 18 water districts, including agencies that supply farmland in the San Joaquin Valley as well as urban agencies in Southern California and Silicon Valley. The largest share of those costs, about $142 million, is being paid by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which delivers water for 19 million people. The MWD isn't expected to decide whether to invest in building the tunnel until 2027. Managers of the Eastern Municipal Water District, which serves about 1 million residents in western Riverside County and northern San Diego County, are among those supporting Newsom's plan. 'The existing conveyance system in the Delta is not sustainable and threatens water supply reliability,' said Joe Mouawad, Eastern Municipal's general manager. 'We've worked diligently over years and decades to diversify our water supply portfolio and provide resilient local water supply, but imported water is still going to be a critical source for our customers and for our communities.' Mouawad noted that the area has some of the fastest growth in California, and he said the Newsom administration's strategy is a 'well-thought-out approach' to meeting long-term water supply needs.


Fox News
2 minutes ago
- Fox News
The Political Battles Over Redistricting and Mail-In Voting
Texas Democrats have returned after fleeing the state earlier this month to prevent the passage of a new Republican-backed redistricting plan, which could add more GOP House seats in next year's mid-term elections. The fight over redrawing congressional maps in the Lone Star State didn't just spark a national debate over gerrymandering but has also motivated California to retaliate with its own redistricting plan that would favor Democrats. Chuck Devore, a Republican executive with the Texas Public Policy Foundation and former California State Assemblyman, joins the FOX News Rundown to discuss the redistricting battles in Texas and California and how they may impact other states' actions and the 2026 Trump has announced plans to issue an executive order aimed at eliminating mail-in voting to 'bring honesty to the midterms.' His statements have reignited the debate over election integrity. Daron Shaw, a member of the Fox News decision desk and polling team and a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, joins the rundown to discuss how mail-in voting in America compares to other countries, the extent of federal government power over elections, and how the issue has become increasingly partisan. Plus, commentary from the Vice President of the Lexington Institute and Military Analyst, Dr. Rebecca Grant. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit