California

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Overdose deaths in San Francisco hit 200 in three months: ‘A crying shame’

      by

      Drug-related deaths surged by 41% in San Francisco in the first quarter of this year – with one person dying of an accidental overdose every 10 hours, as the fentanyl crisis continues to ravage the US west coast.San Francisco saw 200 people die of overdoses in the past three months compared to 142 in the same months a year ago, according to reports by the city’s medical examiner.Those living on the streets were particularly hard hit – with twice as many unhoused people dying of overdoses between January and March compared to a year earlier.Fentanyl was detected in most of the deaths. The city’s minority populations were particularly hard hit. A third of the overdose victims were Black, despite Black people making up only 5% of the city’s population.“It’s a crying shame that a city as wealthy as San Francisco can’t get its act together to deal with overdose deaths,” said Dr Daniel Ciccarone, a professor of addiction medicine at the University of California San Francisco, who said the city’s increasingly punitive approach to handling drug users has only heightened their overdose risks.“We’re a politically divided city between the people who have a lot of money and want the streets swept and those who think a compassionate, science-based, health approach is appropriate,” he said.The spike in deaths began in December and was particularly apparent in January, when 82 deaths put the city’s overdose fatalities at an all time high. This came just after the city government closed a key outreach center, where drug users were using with medical supervision, and increased policing in San Francisco’s drug-plagued Tenderloin district.Last summer, voters recalled the city’s liberal district attorney and the San Francisco mayor London Breed appointed a new district attorney, Brooke Jenkins, who vowed to take a law-and-order approach to the problem and has since stepped up arrests of drug dealers.Then in December, Breed closed the Tenderloin Center, a facility designed to provide daytime shelter for the unhoused, along with housing referrals, food, addiction treatment and health services. The center had unofficially allowed drug use in a supervised outside area. Attendants used Narcan to reverse more than 330 opiate overdoses in the 11 months the center was open, according to city data.The center, which served more than 400 people daily, was opposed by some in the community, who said it was drawing drug users to the already-impacted neighborhood.Breed said in December she had been disappointed by the low number of visitors at the center who ultimately accepted help to get off of drugs. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, fewer than 1% of visits resulted in someone getting connected to addiction treatment services.Since closing the center, Breed has sought $25m to increase police overtime with the priority of arresting drug dealers.“We are dealing with multiple serious public safety challenges locally, from a fentanyl-driven overdose epidemic, open-air drug dealing, property crime in our residential and commercial neighborhoods, increasing gun violence and prejudice-fueled incidents,” she said in a March letter seeking more federal help in policing and prosecuting cases.Last week, the California governor, Gavin Newsom, promised to send in resources and personnel from the national guard and the California highway patrol to bolster policing.Gary McCoy of HealthRIGHT 360, the nonprofit that ran the drug overdose prevention portion of the Tenderloin Center, said the government’s law-enforcement focused approach is backfiring and is instead pushing drug users into isolation, where they are more at risk of overdose deaths.“Something that has been sold to folks as a strategy that is going to work and help tackle the overdose crisis is having the exact opposite effect,” said McCoy, adding that the police tactics create dangers that go beyond the fact that health officials no longer have the chance to witness and reverse overdoses at the Tenderloin Center.“When people don’t have a safe place to go, when they’re using in doorways and public places and they’re afraid of getting caught and put in jail, they tend to rush and use more substance,” he said. “And when they rush, there’s a higher risk of overdose.”Ciccarone said other safe use centers around the world, including one in Melbourne Australia that opened five years ago, have shown to reduce overdoses, bring drug use off the streets and help get addicts into treatment. But he cautioned it takes far longer than 11 months to see the results.“People expected too much from it too soon,” he said of San Francisco’s center. “It gave the outward appearance that people were congregating to consume drugs. But here we have it closed for three months and the first three months show a tremendous rise in overdose deaths.”The city’s supervisors have pushed to replace the Tenderloin Center, which was designed as a temporary measure, with 12 smaller “wellness hubs” around the city. These would provide health and shelter services, as well allowing supervised drug use to prevent overdose deaths.But last summer, Newsom vetoed legislation that would have allowed supervised drug use centers in three California cities, including San Francisco. And the plan for the wellness hubs stalled, after San Francisco’s city attorney raised the objection that the city could wind up bearing significant legal liability.Breed has said she supports the wellness hubs.“These are difficult situations because this involves legal advice, significant criminal liability which we cannot just ignore,” said the mayor, according to KTVU news. Nonprofits are now seeking a way to fund the overdose prevention portions of their operations without city funding.In a statement, the San Francisco Department of Health (SFDPH) said it has undertaken a host of measures to prevent overdoses, including adding hundreds of new beds for addiction recovery treatment, expanding neighborhood street care teams and making Narcan and medication-assisted addiction treatment options more available.“SFDPH recognizes that any overdose death is one too many and mourns the loss of each of these lives,” the department said. It added the department is also looking for legal ways to open supervised use clinics. “These deaths drive us to find more ways to prevent overdoses and reduce the harms caused by fentanyl.”Breed and the new district attorney have touted increased arrests and jail time for drug dealers. In a April blog post, the mayor said police made 162 arrests for drug possession for sales in the last three months of 2022, an 80% increase, and are seizing dozens of kilograms of narcotics.“These enforcement actions will continue, while our street outreach teams continue to go out and offer services and treatment,” wrote Breed.But Alex Kral, an epidemiologist at the independent nonprofit research institute RTI International, who led an evaluation of the Tenderloin Center, said the drug dealing arrests actually make the drug supply more dangerous by forcing users to go to people they don’t know for their drug supply and forcing users into hiding.“You’re making an unpredictable drug market even more unpredictable,” he said.“We’ve spent the last 50 years trying to arrest our way out of this and it’s clearly not working. The conditions on the streets are getting worse, the drugs are becoming more dangerous and the health of the community is much, much worse with increased policing.”According to San Francisco supervisor Hillary Ronen, who has championed the idea of wellness hubs, the city has failed to come up with any new tactics to deal with a “horrific crisis”.“We closed the Tenderloin Center with no plan in place to replace it,” she said. “Fentanyl is corrupting every part of the drug supply and all the social problems that underlie the drug addiction crisis continue – widespread poverty, trauma with no access to mental health care, inequality, and homelessness.”“What did we expect to happen?” More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Democratic states stockpile abortion pills as legal fight for access looms

      by

      Despite a reprieve by the US supreme court, a growing number of Democratic states are stockpiling abortion pills as the legal fight for access to the abortion drug mifepristone is set to continue.On Friday, the supreme court decided to temporarily block a lower court ruling that would have significantly restricted the availability of mifepristone, an FDA-approved abortion medication.Nevertheless, as the case continues to wind through America’s court system and remains challenged by anti-abortion groups, more Democratic states are now stockpiling abortion pills amid an unpredictable legal battle.Earlier this month, Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas issued a preliminary injunction that suspended the FDA’s approval of mifepristone, calling it a drug that is used to “kill the unborn human”.Swiftly after Kacsmaryk’s ruling, Democratic states have been stockpiling abortion pills including mifepristone as well as misoprostol, the second drug in the abortion regimen which can also be used on its own, although less effectively.At the Massachusetts governor Maura Healey’s request, the University of Massachusetts Amherst has purchased approximately 15,000 doses of mifepristone. The stockpile is expected to offer “sufficient coverage” in the state for over a year.“Mifepristone has been used safely for more than 20 years and is the gold standard. Here in Massachusetts, we are not going to let one extremist judge in Texas turn back the clock on this proven medication and restrict access to care in our state,” Healey said last week.Meanwhile, the Democratic governors of New York and California both announced plans to stockpile misoprostol in attempts to safeguard their states’ abortion access.New York’s governor Kathy Hochul announced last week that New York will be purchasing misoprostol in order to stockpile 150,000 doses, a five-year supply.Hochul also pledged that if mifepristone is removed from the market, New York will commit up to an additional $20m to providers to support other abortion methods.In a similar move, governor Gavin Newsom of California announced last week that the state has secured an emergency stockpile of up to 2m misoprostol pills“We will not cave to extremists who are trying to outlaw these critical abortion services. Medication abortion remains legal in California,” Newsom said, adding that California has shared the negotiated terms of its misoprostol purchase agreement to assist other states in securing the pill at low cost.Since then, additional Democratic states have followed suit.The governor of Maryland, Wes Moore, recently announced a partnership with the University of Maryland’s medical system to purchase a “substantial amount of mifepristone”.“This purchase is another example of our administration’s commitment to ensure Maryland remains a safe haven for abortion access and quality reproductive health care,” said Moore, who also released $3.5m in previously withheld funding for the state’s abortion care clinical training program.On Thursday, Oregon made a similar announcement, with its governor Tina Kotek revealing the state has secured a three-year supply of mifepristone, regardless of the supreme court’s ruling on the pill.“Here in Oregon, I will make sure that patients are able to access the medication they need and providers are able to provide that medication without unnecessary, politically motivated interference and intimidation,” Kotek said.With Democratic states rushing to stock up on abortion pills, the tumultuous legal fight for abortion access is far from over. In the last nine months, 13 states have banned abortion. With anti-abortion groups fighting for increased pill restrictions nationwide, even states that have legalized the procedure may become affected.Following the supreme court’s decision to temporarily block mifepristone restrictions, the next stage of the litigious battle over the drug will take place in the fifth circuit, with oral arguments scheduled for 17 May. The case will then likely return back to the supreme court.In a statement to the New York Times, Erik Baptist, a senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal organization representing a coalition of anti-abortion groups and doctors, pledged to continue fighting against abortion care.“The FDA must answer for the damage it has caused to the health of countless women and girls and the rule of law by failing to study how dangerous the chemical abortion drug regimen is and unlawfully removing every meaningful safeguard, even allowing for mail-order abortions,” he said about the 23-year-old FDA-approved drug.Meanwhile, the Joe Biden administration and civil rights organizations promised to continue fighting for reproductive rights.“I’ll continue to fight attacks on women’s health. The American people must also continue to use their vote as their voice and elect a Congress that will restore the protections of Roe v Wade,” Biden tweeted shortly after the supreme court issued its decision.The American Civil Liberties Union echoed similar sentiments, with Jennifer Dalven, ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project director saying: “Make no mistake, we aren’t out of the woods by any means … And as this baseless lawsuit shows, extremists will use every trick in the book to try to ban abortion nationwide.”Dalven added: “But if our opponents think we will allow them to continue to pursue their extreme goals without fierce backlash, they are sorely mistaken.” More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Why California is taking on caste-based discrimination

      by

      Last month state senator Aisha Wahab introduced SB 403, a historic bill that, if enacted, would make California the first state to ban caste-based discrimination in the US.Practiced for centuries in the Indian subcontinent, caste is an exclusionary system within the Hindu religion that divides people and determines their access to resources. Unlike class, caste is an ascribed status; there’s no mobility to move upwards. Generally, Brahmin communities are in the highest social order, whereas the Dalit community is at the bottom.Because of the fast-growing South Asian diaspora, caste has also manifested as a burning issue in the US. A 2018 survey conducted by Equity Labs – a leading US-based Dalit organization – found that two out of three workers reported facing caste prejudices at their workplace in the US. Several instances of discrimination against Dalit students and employees in elite universities and tech companies like Google with large South Asian populations have exposed the problem.In February, Seattle became the first city in the US and the first jurisdiction outside South Asia to ban caste-based discrimination. And in 2020, Brandeis University became the first university in the US to ban caste-based discrimination, followed by Harvard University, California State University, the University of California, Davis, and Brown University.Wahab, who represents the 10th district of California, which is home to a diverse Asian population, said including caste in the protected category and expanding the understanding of discrimination is essential given how diverse the country is becoming.“It’s not accurate to say that caste-based prejudices don’t exist in the United States,” Wahab said. “Caste is a taboo topic. Although I am not ethnically of the same community, still people have come and told me that ‘What you are doing, nobody in our community has the courage to do so.’”The first Afghan American and Muslim elected to the California state senate, Wahab has received support as well as hostility from community members after introducing the bill. Some people even organized protests against this bill.The Guardian interviewed Wahab about when she became aware of caste biases and what inspired her to write this legislation.The interview has been edited for clarity and length.When did you become aware of the caste biases that exist in South Asian communities?I learned about the caste system through public education. Community members in my district have told me how their parents married different people of different castes and their families weren’t accepting. Thus, they moved to the United States but were still discriminated against in the community surroundings.The truth is caste-based discrimination happens far more than people think and realize, especially considering that the caste system is more than 3,000 years old and is very much ingrained in so many people. I am hearing more about the biases as more people are talking about them. Some people have told me that they would have separate bathrooms at restaurants for people working versus the people owning the restaurants. Because of the caste system people are treated very differently and they are restricted by their families on whom they can marry. These are all the issues that are not talked about in the mainstream media and public.What inspired you to write and introduce this bill to ban caste-based discrimination?My district is largely diverse and hugely populated in the state of California. And a lot of issues regarding caste stemmed in my district. For example the Cisco situation, California State [University] East Bay situation and several other issues. Since more and more people would talk to me about it and explain some of the problems they were having, I just wanted to address this issue through this bill to protect people.Why do you think caste is an American issue now?America is getting more diverse. We are seeing more and more types of discrimination based on things that the United States has historically not had the depth to deal with. To say caste is not an American issue is incorrect. The more diverse the country becomes, the more we are going to see a surge of these kinds of prejudices. And we have already started seeing that. Just take the example of the Google case and several other cases happening in the Bay Area as well as across the country. Why did Seattle feel the need to ban caste-based discrimination? Why is Toronto also doing the same? Why is there such a big movement to tackle this issue? Because it’s happening. So we as policymakers want to be proactive and make sure that all people are protected regardless of where they come from or their background or anything like that.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionYou represent a district from Silicon Valley that is home to a growing South Asian population in the US. How long has caste been talked about as a political issue in this community?There are communities that have no idea what a caste system is. And there are other communities that are bringing this up as to why they are rejected from different opportunities whether it’s housing or jobs. I think caste is in discussion but it is a little taboo to talk about. In the United States most people try to pretend that there’s no caste prejudice here and everyone is living their best lives. But the truth is that people can only live their best lives when they are protected under United States law.What kind of support have you received from the South Asian communities regarding this bill?Every day I receive hundreds of calls and emails about this bill. People from different ethnic communities and different religious backgrounds have reached out to me and extended their support. I want to highlight that I personally feel great that people are finding the courage to speak out against what they have always believed was wrong but were too afraid to talk about. If this bill gives even a handful of people some freedom to live their own life, I will be really happy.You have also received violent threats from groups who are against this bill. What do you have to say about this?We have been hearing the arguments against the bill and some people are conflating religion with the caste movement, which is wrong. This bill is trying to primarily protect people against discrimination. Anybody who is opposed to this bill has some other motive because this bill is to help people. It’s not to cause harm and it will not.Also, it is interesting to me that the groups that tend to speak against this bill, the counterparts of the same religion, same ethnicity, same caste level, actually do support this bill. There are people on both sides of this argument.You have claimed that this bill is a civil rights bill, a workers’ bill, a women’s rights bill and a human rights bill. Can you further elaborate on this?This bill literally allows the people to live their life without the judgment of what caste, family or ancestry they belong to. It will add to the already protected categories of religion, ethnicity and gender. This bill is primarily to expand our law, and to protect our more and more diverse community members. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘We will not cave’: governors stockpile abortion drugs as access is threatened

      by

      Several Democratic governors have moved swiftly to protect access to medication abortion in their states after a ruling by a Texas judge late last week threatened access to the widely used abortion drug mifepristone.In an announcement on Monday, Governor Maura Healey of Massachusetts said her state had ordered about 15,000 doses of mifepristone, the first of two drugs in a medication abortion regimen that has been approved for use up to the 10th week of pregnancy.Healey also issued an executive order that she said would help protect access to medication abortions and shield providers who perform them.In California, Governor Gavin Newsom, also a Democrat, said his state had secured an emergency stockpile of up to 2m pills of misoprostol, the second drug in the regimen that can be used safely on its own, though is slightly less effective as a single medication. That drug, which is used to treat other medical conditions, is also being targeted by anti-abortion groups seeking to remove it from the market.“In response to this extremist ban on a medication abortion drug, our state has secured a stockpile of an alternative medication abortion drug to ensure that Californians continue to have access to safe reproductive health treatments,” Newsom said in a statement. “We will not cave to extremists who are trying to outlaw these critical abortion services. Medication abortion remains legal in California.”Their actions come after US district judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, an appointee of Donald Trump known for his anti-abortion views, issued a ruling late on Friday that invalidated the 23-year-old approval of mifepristone by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On the same night, a federal judge in Washington state issued a contradictory ruling that ordered the FDA to maintain the drug’s approval in at least 17 states where Democrats had sued.On Monday, the US justice department appealed the Texas ruling, asking a federal appeals court to place a hold on the “extraordinary and unprecedented order”. Underscoring the legal uncertainty surrounding the dueling orders, the administration separately asked the federal court in Washington state for clarity.With access to the drug imperiled, and Democrats stymied in Washington by the Republican majority in the House of Representatives, a handful of liberal state governors said they were taking matters into their own hands.“A judge has made a politically motivated decision to override doctors, patients and medical experts and block access to critical medications,” Healey said on Monday, unveiling the plan at a press conference outside the Massachusetts statehouse in Boston. “Today, we collectively are saying loud and clear: not on our watch.”In anticipation of the Texas ruling, the Democratic governor of Washington, Jay Inslee, announced last week that his state would stockpile a three-year supply of mifepristone in the event the drug became more difficult to access. Days later, Kacsmaryk issued his ruling.Several other Democratic governors and state attorneys general have condemned the ruling while seeking to make clear that, at least for now, the drug remains available. Some went further, promising to keep medication abortion legal and accessible in their states, although without providing further details.More than half of abortions in the US rely on medication abortion, and most of those involve the two-drug protocol. If the appeals court doesn’t intervene, the Texas ruling would take effect on Friday with far-reaching implications for access.The FDA approved mifepristone to terminate pregnancy in 2000, when used with misoprostol. Despite claims made in the Texas lawsuit, there is decades’ worth of scientific research concluding that mifepristone is safe.States have become the epicenter of the fight over abortion rights since the supreme court’s landmark decision last June to overturn Roe v Wade. Since then, more than a dozen Republican-led states have enacted abortion bans or severely restricted access to the procedure.​Anti-abortion groups have long targeted medication abortion, the most common method for terminating a pregnancy in the US. But it became the focus of efforts after the supreme court’s landmark decision last June to overturn Roe v Wade, allowing states to regulate abortion.Although more than a dozen Republican-led states moved quickly to ban or severely restrict abortions​, with scores of new limits pending before state legislatures this session, Democratic-led states have pushed in the opposite direction. Yet if the Texas ruling stands, experts say it would upend access nationwide, limiting the drug even in states where abortion is legal.Abortion opponents in blue states denounced the efforts by Democratic governors to preserve access to medication abortion.“It is appalling that Gavin Newsom is so obsessed with ending the lives of children in the womb that he is attempting to stockpile dangerous and potentially illegal drugs,” California Family Council president Jonathan Keller wrote on Twitter. “California again proves the only ‘choice’ they care about is abortion.”Newsom said the judge’s ruling “ignores facts, science and the law” in a way that puts “the health of millions of women and girls at risk”.“Abortion is still legal and accessible here in California and we won’t stand by as fundamental freedoms are stripped away,” he said.Other supporters of abortion rights similarly denounced the conservative judge’s decision on abortion as “unprincipled” and out of step with the American public. In states where the issue has been put on the ballot, from right-leaning Kansas to battleground Michigan and liberal Vermont, voters have opted to preserve or expand access.“I’ve fought like hell to protect abortion access and I’m not backing down,” Michigan’s governor, Gretchen Whitmer, said on Friday. “I will keep taking steps to expand access to reproductive healthcare and fight against anyone threatening our rights.”Whitmer recently signed legislation repealing the state’s nearly century-old abortion ban, after Michigan voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot initiative in November to enshrine abortion protections into the state constitution.Democrats and reproductive rights advocates believe the issue will continue to motivate voters in the coming election cycles after lifting them to victories across the country in the 2022 midterms. Last week’s election of a liberal judge to serve on the Wisconsin supreme court brought fresh evidence of the enduring potency of abortion politics.“This decision will only enrage Americans further and move them to more action,” Mini Timmaraju, president of the Naral Pro-Choice America advocacy group, said on a call with reporters on Monday. “Our eyes are on 2023 and 2024 – 2022 was just the beginning.” More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Ro Khanna Endorses Barbara Lee’s Senate Campaign as He Declines to Run

      by

      The race in California to succeed Senator Dianne Feinstein is likely to be one of the most expensive in the nation in 2024.Representative Ro Khanna of California said on Sunday that he would not run in an already crowded Democratic field seeking to succeed his state’s senior senator, Dianne Feinstein, who is retiring at the end of her term.In deep-blue California, the Democratic winner of the primary is likely to join Alex Padilla in representing the state in the Senate. The major Democrats already running are three representatives: Katie Porter, a social media darling of liberal Democrats; Adam Schiff, who led the first impeachment of Donald J. Trump; and Barbara Lee, the sole member of Congress to oppose a broad war authorization after the Sept. 11 attacks.Mr. Khanna, who represents Silicon Valley, made his announcement on “State of the Union” on CNN, telling the host Jake Tapper that the best place “for me to serve as a progressive is in the House of Representatives.”He added, “I’m honored to be co-chairing Barbara Lee’s campaign for the Senate and endorsing her today. We need a strong antiwar senator, and she will play that role.”The race in California is likely to be one of the most expensive and competitive in the nation in 2024. Mr. Schiff, who represents a Los Angeles-area district, and Ms. Porter, of Orange County, have already raised millions to support their campaigns, while Ms. Lee, whose district includes Oakland, has lagged.Ms. Lee is seeking to become just the third Black woman in the Senate. The House has 28 Black women serving in its ranks, a high-water mark, but the Senate currently has none, a point Mr. Khanna emphasized on Sunday.“Frankly, Jake, representation matters,” he said. “We don’t have a single African American woman in the United States Senate. She would fill that role. She’ll be the only candidate from Northern California and she’s going to, I think, consolidate a lot of progressives. The other two are formidable candidates, but I think Barbara Lee is going to be very, very strong.” More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      After Dianne Feinstein: as a political giant steps down, California weighs its future

      by

      When Dianne Feinstein arrived in Washington in 1992, her home state of California was solidly purple and Republican Pete Wilson occupied the governor’s office.More than 30 years later, as the oldest member of Congress and California’s longest serving senator prepares to retire, her state is arguably the most reliably blue in the US.Feinstein’s protracted career as a senator also charts the rise of California as a political power player on Capitol Hill, whose 55 electoral votes – the largest block by far, with Texas and Florida as distant seconds – have helped guarantee a Democrat in the White House for six out of the last eight terms.Yet despite Feinstein’s early history as a transformative feminist from San Francisco, her perch in the top rungs of Senate leadership has outlasted its welcome among her increasingly liberal base. Grumblings about her willingness to work with Republicans, as well as concerns about her physical and mental competence, has left many clamouring for a changing of the guard, meaning the race to replace her in November 2024 is destined to become among the most hotly contested and consequential races in Democratic party politics.So far, three candidates have surfaced. Two of them, Adam Schiff and Barbara Lee, are veteran liberal legislators, having been in office since 2001 and 1998, respectively, while Katie Porter, a progressive congresswoman from traditionally conservative Orange county, is a rising star who first took office in 2019. Apparently not one for following party protocols, Porter stunned some observers by announcing her candidacy a full month before Feinstein made her retirement official early this February.Of the three, Schiff, who helped steer two successive impeachments against Donald Trump, has the most experience and name recognition. He also has the backing of the former House speaker Nancy Pelosi, whereas Porter counts Elizabeth Warren among her supporters. Both have more cash on hand than Lee, who also polls lower, despite impeccable liberal credentials that include being the only member of Congress to vote against giving President Bush unlimited war powers after 9/11.One thing that’s clear: that whoever voters choose, it will be someone to the left of Feinstein. Gustavo Arellano, a columnist for the Los Angeles Times, describes the changing of the guard as a completion of California’s political arc.In the early 1970s, more than half of Californians voted to reelect Richard Nixon and even San Francisco had a Republican mayor. Fast forward to now, and Democratic state lawmakers in Sacramento outnumber Republicans by a ridiculous margin: 62 Democrats versus 18 Republicans in the assembly, and a senate composed of 32 Democrats and only eight Republicans. California hasn’t elected a Republican to statewide office since 2007, when Arnold Schwarzenegger left the governor’s mansion, and its voters are increasingly the most liberal and diverse in the nation.“Dianne Feinstein leaving office marks the end of an era where California politics were more moderate,” said Arellano, who credits the California Republican party’s racially divisive position on immigration with laying the groundwork for the Democrats’ seemingly permanent lock on state politics. “California has always been a bellweather in so many things,” he said.“The fact that the two leading candidates to replace Feinstein are progressive Democrats is a victory for the left. But it’s also a warning for Republicans: this will be your fate if you don’t get your act together.”A ‘miserable’ beginningFeinstein’s journey from San Francisco’s city hall to Washington began in 1969 when she first joined the city’s board of supervisors. It was a tumultuous era marked by anti-Vietnam war protests and, particularly in San Francisco, rising demands for equality by women and gay people. For Feinstein, the late ’60s and early ’70s provided ample opportunity to challenge sexist stereotypes in American politics.It’s difficult to overstate Feinstein’s role as a political pioneer, said Jerry Roberts, a former managing editor of the San Francisco Chronicle, who wrote a 1994 biography of Feinstein that focused on her role in city politics. “She was a trailblazer who knocked down doors for women,” he continued. “Her legacy is Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Kamala Harris, and all the women who came after her.”Feinstein lost two successive races for San Francisco mayor in the 1970s. “It was largely because voters and women in particular still didn’t feel comfortable with women in office,” Roberts said. Feinstein eventually assumed the role by dint of tragedy, when George Moscone, the city’s Democratic mayor, was assassinated by a disgruntled city official in 1978. The same shooter also murdered Harvey Milk, a city supervisor and the first openly gay man to hold public office in the nation.“She got into office the most miserable way,” said Roberts.Feinstein quickly developed a bipartisan reputation as a hard-nosed workaholic who early on recognized the danger of Aids, crusading against gay bathhouses while defending the dignity of the disease’s victims. She was legendary for responding to the concerns of her constituents, and to the amusement of local journalists would often respond to building blazes dressed in a yellow coat to show solidarity for the city’s firefighters.“She was very hands on, so people hated working for her, which they still do, but the voters liked that,” explained Roberts. “When she left office nine years later, she had a 70% approval rating. It was pretty remarkable.”After losing a gubernatorial race to Pete Wilson in 1990, Feinstein positioned herself to statewide voters as a moderate centrist. Two years later, she won a special election to his vacant senate seat. Her senate victory joined those of fellow Californian Barbara Boxer and Maryland’s Barbara Mikulski to make 1992 the “Year of the Woman”.Feinstein was re-elected two years later and authored the nation’s first federal assault weapons ban. Her hard work on Capitol Hill helped make her the first female chairperson of both the Senate rules and intelligence committees. But as her influence in Washington grew, she also cemented a reputation as a policy hawk who typically voted with Republicans on defense appropriations.After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Feinstein became a key supporter of the US invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq. She later changed her position on Iraq, saying she was misled by George Bush, and became an outspoken critic of the CIA’s use of torture in the war on terror. Her investigation into which infamously led the agency to allegedly illegally spy on her office.Outlasting her welcomeHer achievements as senator notwithstanding, the tide began to turn against her in recent years, and as the specter of her retirement loomed, so did questions of who should represent the next chapter of California politics.When Feinstein last ran for her seat in 2018, the California Democratic party, in a display of long-simmering dissatisfaction with her moderate politics, backed her more liberal opponent from the state senate, Kevin De Leon. It’s a shift that makes sense to Mark Baldassare, a survey director at the Public Policy Institute of California and a longtime political observer. “The state’s electorate is more racially and ethnically diverse now, especially among Democrats, a quarter of whom are Latino.”After nearly six full terms in office, Feinstein seemed unfocused and out of touch to both staffers and colleagues. In October 2020, following the confirmation of Donald Trump’s supreme court pick Amy Coney Barrett, Feinstein drew ire if not outright bewilderment among Democrats for hugging Republican Lindsey Graham, who was instrumental in securing the conservative domination of the court, and praising the volatile proceedings as “one of the best set of hearings that I’ve participated in”.The Coney Barrett fiasco led to calls for Feinstein’s ouster from Senate leadership appointments as well as concerns about her mental state. In retrospect, it marked the beginning of the end of her career in Washington. More recent headlines have focused on her physical frailty, particularly after a dose of shingles last month sent her to the hospital.“Progressives have always despised Feinstein going back to her days in San Francisco,” remarked the Times’ Arellano. “Even now, everybody is giving respect to her for retiring but nobody is shedding any tears.”A typical perspective among progressives is that of Marc Cooper, a former Nation magazine writer and journalism professor at the University of Southern California who now publishes an online political newsletter. To him, Feinstein’s legacy in California is the Democratic leadership’s abandonment of grassroots, anti-war politics in favor of large donor-dominated neoliberal elitism.“You can pick apart Feinstein and say there are times she’s acted like a Republican, but it’s a waste of time,” Cooper said. “We have never had a point in my lifetime when the political world is more distant from most people’s lives than it is now. The Democratic party in California used to be quite vibrant and that’s all been replaced by money.”Not everyone is quite so harsh, with others describing Feinstein a venerable figure who simply outlasted her welcome. “Feinstein is a great woman,” argued noted California journalist and author Anne Louise Bardach. “She’s been tremendous, but she overstayed her time.” Bardach believes the longtime illness and eventual death last year of Feinstein’s second husband, Richard Blum, took an immense emotional toll.” I think it was probably a huge burden for her,” Bardach said. “If he had been alive, she would have likely stepped down much earlier.”The Guardian reached out to Feinstein for an interview, but did not hear back.California’s next political chapterCalifornia voters will get their first chance to weigh in on Feinstein’s successor in the March 2024 Democratic primary race. That’s a good eight months before the general election, meaning that the public can expect a long ride of campaigning and political jockeying, including expensive television ads, and the possibility of public debates and even personal attacks.All of that, however, assumes that Feinstein does not retire early or leave office for medical reasons. If that happens, California’s governor Gavin Newsom has the responsibility to choose her immediate replacement, and has already pledged that person will be a Black woman.Jodi Balma, a political science professor at Fullerton College in southern California, believes that Newsom is unlikely to appoint Lee, however, as that would unfairly tip the race in her favor. “I’m sure he’s hoping not to have to make that decision,” Balma said of Newsom. One name that came up among those close to Newsom is Willie Brown, the longtime Democratic kingmaker and retired San Francisco mayor, according to Balma. “To be a caretaker senator would be the crowning achievement of his political career.”Assuming that scenario doesn’t play out, polling has so far suggested that the deep-pocketed Schiff has the lead, with Porter closely behind and Lee a distant third. Making the race more complicated is the fact that California’s primary laws allow the top two candidates from each political party’s March primary race to run for the general election in November.According to Balma, the consensus in Sacramento is that the last thing the party wants is two Democrats splitting a November vote, thus allowing room for a Republican challenger to win. “The Democrats don’t want two candidates fighting between March and November with negative attacks and commercials telling the voters how bad they are.”Regardless, the nation will be watching closely.“It’s a long way to the primary, but this race is attracting national attention because it’s indicative of the new leadership in California and what it means nationally for the future of the Democratic party,” said Baldassare. “There’s no question that there are some big shoes to fill.” More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Eric Garcetti confirmed as US ambassador to India after contentious 20-month fight

      by

      Eric Garcetti, the former mayor of Los Angeles, was confirmed on Wednesday as the nation’s next ambassador to India, 20 months after he was first nominated by Joe Biden and after weathering doubts about his truthfulness in a sexual harassment scandal involving a top adviser during his time at City Hall.The 52-42 vote in a divided Senate gave the administration a long-sought victory in filling one of the country’s highest-profile diplomatic posts.The president “believes that we have a crucial and consequential partnership with India and that Mayor Garcetti will make a strong and effective ambassador,” said a White House spokesperson, Olivia Dalton, after the vote.The session began with uncertain prospects for Garcetti, a two-term, progressive Democrat first nominated to the prominent diplomatic post by Biden in July 2021.With several Democratic defections, Garcetti’s fate rested with enlisting Republicans in a chamber often divided along partisan lines. He secured seven GOP votes to advance the nomination to a final vote.The Republican senator Susan Collins of Maine said, “I met with him personally. He clearly has an enormous amount of expertise about India. India’s been two years without an ambassador, and that is far too long. And I am going to support him.”The vacancy in the ambassadorship has left a significant diplomatic gap for the administration at a time of rising global tensions, including China’s increasingly assertive presence in the Pacific region and Russia’s war with Ukraine.India, the world’s most populous democracy, is continuing to buy oil from Russia, while western governments move to limit fossil fuel earnings that support Moscow’s budget, its military and its invasion of Ukraine. Russia also provides the majority of India’s military hardware.The nomination has been freighted with questions about what the former mayor knew, and when, about sexual harassment allegations against his friend and once-close adviser, Rick Jacobs. A lawsuit alleges that Jacobs frequently harassed one of the then-mayor’s police bodyguards while Garcetti ignored the abuse or laughed it off.Garcetti, the son of the former Los Angeles district attorney Gil Garcetti, has repeatedly denied the claims. Jacobs has called the allegations against him “pure fiction”. The case is scheduled to go to trial later this year.At a Senate committee hearing in December 2021, Garcetti said, “I never witnessed, nor was it brought to my attention, the behavior that’s been alleged … If it had been, I would have immediately taken action to stop that.”Wednesday’s vote tested Democratic loyalty to Biden, and also measured assessments of Garcetti’s judgment and trustworthiness, stemming from the City Hall allegations that shadowed him in the #MeToo era.“I think we can find somebody that will do the job better,” said Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio, one of the Democrats who signaled opposition to Garcetti.Garcetti also failed to win over Democrat Mark Kelly of Arizona, who said he had “serious concerns”.Garcetti’s confirmation follows a contentious tenure at Los Angeles City Hall framed by the twin crises of homelessness and the pandemic, rising crime rates and sexual harassment and corruption scandals. The Los Angeles area, once known for boundless growth, has seen its population decline.The former mayor, who took office in 2013, has been credited with continuing a transit buildup in a city choked with traffic, and establishing tougher earthquake safety standards for thousands of buildings.An Ivy Leaguer and Rhodes scholar, he spent two decades in city government either as mayor or a city councilman and took a circuitous path toward the diplomatic corps. Ambassadorships are frequently a reward for political supporters.Garcetti considered a 2020 White House run but later became part of Biden’s inner circle, emerging as a widely discussed possibility to join Biden’s cabinet. He took himself out of the running after many of the plum jobs had been filled, saying the coronavirus crisis at the time made it impossible for him to step away from City Hall. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Joe Biden to unveil executive order to crackdown on law breaking gun sellers

      by

      Joe Biden will announce on Tuesday that he is ordering the attorney general, Merrick Garland, to crack down on gun sellers who break the law, “moving the US as close to universal background checks as possible”, the White House said.The president will speak in Monterey Park, California, meeting victims’ families and community members devastated by a mass shooting that claimed 11 lives and injured nine other people in January.Opinion polls show that a majority of both Democrats and Republicans support universal background checks that would reveal whether a person is a convicted criminal or domestic abuser before allowing them to buy a gun. But with Republicans in control of the House of Representatives, there is little hope of Congress heeding Biden’s pleas to pass legislation.On a swing through California, the president will acknowledge this political reality and unveil an executive order to enforce existing laws against gun sellers who, knowingly or otherwise, currently fail to run the background checks they should.On a conference call with reporters, a senior administration official said last year’s bipartisan gun safety legislation – the most sweeping of its kind in three decades – “created an opening” for Biden to direct the attorney general to move the US as close to universal background checks as possible without additional legislation.He will ask Garland to clarify the statutory definition of who is “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms, the official said. “Number one, to make it clear that those who are wilfully violating the law need to come into compliance with the law and, number two, to make it clear to people who may not realise that, under that statutory definition they are indeed in the business of selling firearms, they must become federally licensed firearm dealers and they must run background checks before gun sales.”The administration argues that this will mean fewer guns sold without background checks and therefore fewer guns ending up in the hands of criminals and domestic abusers. Garland will also devise a plan to stop gun dealers whose licenses have been revoked or surrendered from continuing to trade.There will be an effort to hold the gun industry accountable by naming and shaming federally licensed firearms dealers who are violating the law. Garland will release Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives records from the inspection of firearms dealers cited for breaking laws.The executive order also aims to boost public awareness of “red-flag” laws that allow individuals to petition a court to allow police to confiscate weapons from a person adjudged dangerous to themselves or others.These extreme risk protection orders have been enacted in 19 states and the District of Columbia but, the White House noted, are only effective if the public knows when and how to use them. Biden’s cabinet will be asked to work with law enforcement, healthcare providers, educators and other community leaders to ensure their effective use and to promote the safe storage of guns.The senior administration official insisted that, whatever the likely resistance from Republicans and certain localities, the president’s actions enjoy broad support. “These are not controversial solutions anywhere except for in Washington DC in Congress. The actions the president is proposing to move closer to universal background checks are just common sense.“Similarly, safe storage, extreme protection orders, these are things that have the support of the vast majority of Americans. The vast majority of Americans are looking for a leader in Washington who will take change and make their community safer and that is exactly what the president is doing here.”Biden, who has previously called gun violence in America “an epidemic” and “international embarrassment”, will further order efforts to counter a sharp rise in the loss or theft of firearms during shipping, enlist the Pentagon in improving public safety practices and encourage the Federal Trade Commission to issue a report analysing how gun makers market firearms to children, including through the use of military imagery.In addition, he will seek to improve federal support for gun violence survivors, victims and survivors’ families. The White House pointed out in a press release that, when a hurricane overwhelms a community, the Federal Emergency Management Agency steps in.But when a mass shooting does so, “no coordinated US government mechanism exists to meet short- and long-term needs, such as mental healthcare for grief and trauma, financial assistance (for example, when a family loses the sole breadwinner or when a small business is shut down due to a lengthy shooting investigation), and food (for example, when the Buffalo shooting closed down the only grocery store in the neighborhood)”. More