More stories

  • in

    Newsom airs Florida ad urging people to fight for freedom – or move to California

    Newsom airs Florida ad urging people to fight for freedom – or move to California‘Freedom is under attack in your state,’ California governor says in ad paid for by his re-election campaign that aired on Fox News Governor Gavin Newsom of California has aired a commercial in Florida over the Fourth of July holiday weekend urging residents there to fight for freedom, or move to his state in order to find it.The ad – which pits blue state California against currently red state Florida – exemplified the growing divides in the US as Republican-led state legislatures have pursued rightwing policies on a slew of issues from banning abortion to attacking LGBTQ+ rights and voting issues.As Trump’s star wanes, another rises: could Ron DeSantis be the new Maga bearer?Read more“Freedom is under attack in your state,” California’s Democratic leader said in the punchy advertisement, paid for by Newsom’s re-election campaign and aired on the rightwing Fox News channel.“Republican leaders – They’re banning books, making it harder to vote, restricting speech in classrooms, even criminalizing women and doctors. I urge all of you to join the fight, or join us in California, where we still believe in freedom.”Newsom appeared to be taking jabs at Florida’s far-right governor, Ron DeSantis, and his recent efforts to disenfranchise voters, chip away at the civil rights of LGBTQ+ communities, and restrict access to abortion. It’s a picture of the current political landscape in America: two state leaders on opposite coasts of the country with directly conflicting ideologies.But Newsom’s strategy of fighting fire with fire is one not typically seen from the country’s democratic party.While Newsom has ruled out any interest in running for president in the near future, some speculate DeSantis, a Trump favorite and fellow rightwinger, will bid for the Republican party’s presidential nomination in 2024. In April, after DeSantis signed the “don’t say gay” bill into law, books were banned across the state. Florida’s department of education has also rejected 41% of math textbooks they believed were pushing ideologies like critical race theory or social and emotional learning in order to “indoctrinate students”.Last year, DeSantis also signed more restrictive voting measures into law, like limiting ballot drop-box hours and requesting mail-in ballots every year, instead of every four years. DeSantis said the restrictions will curb voter fraud, despite little evidence there is such a problem.And after the supreme court overturned landmark case Roe vs Wade, which gave US citizens the constitutional right to an abortion, DeSantis signed a law into effect banning abortions after 15 weeks without exception for rape or incest. A state judge temporarily blocked the law, calling it unconstitutional. But a spokesperson for DeSantis said the state plans to appeal the ruling.By contrast, Newsom signed a bill protecting abortion providers in his state from liability or prosecution for providing out-of-state abortions. California lawmakers also voted to ask voters on their November ballots to add an amendment to the state’s constitution that would explicitly protect reproductive rights.TopicsGavin NewsomFloridaCaliforniaFox NewsRon DeSantisUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    California to vote on adding abortion rights protection to state constitution

    California to vote on adding abortion rights protection to state constitutionThe amendment added to this year’s ballot is part of Democrats’ aggressive strategy to expand access to abortion California voters will decide in November whether to guarantee the right to an abortion in their state constitution, a question sure to boost turnout on both sides of the debate during a pivotal midterm election year as Democrats try to keep control of Congress after the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade.The court’s ruling on Friday gives states the authority to decide whether to allow abortion. California is controlled by Democrats who support abortion rights, so access to the procedure won’t be threatened anytime soon.But the legal right to an abortion in California is based upon the “right to privacy” in the state constitution. The supreme court’s ruling declared that a right to privacy does not guarantee the right to an abortion. California Democrats fear this ruling could leave the state’s abortion laws vulnerable to challenge in state courts.California abortion clinics braced for out-of-state surge as bans kick inRead moreTo fix that, California lawmakers on Monday agreed to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot this year that would leave no doubt about the status of abortion in California.The amendment would declare that the state “shall not deny or interfere with an individual’s reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and their fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives”.California joins Vermont in trying to protect abortion in its state constitution. The Vermont proposal, also on the ballot this November, does not include the word “abortion” but would protect “personal reproductive autonomy” – although there is an exception “justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means”.Meanwhile, four conservative states – Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee and West Virginia – have constitutions that say a right to an abortion is not protected, according to the Guttmacher Institute, an abortion rights group.The amendment in California is part of Democrats’ aggressive strategy to expand access to abortion in response to the US supreme court’s ruling. Last week, Gavin Newsom signed a law aimed at shielding California abortion providers and volunteers from lawsuits in other states – a law aimed at blunting a Texas law that allows private citizens to sue people who help women in that state get an abortion.California’s massive budget includes more than $200m to expand access to abortion in the state. The money would help pay for abortions for women who can’t afford them, scholarships for abortion providers and a new website listing all of the state’s abortion services in one place.The budget also includes $20m to help women pay for the logistics of an abortion, including travel, lodging and child care. But the Newsom administration says the money can’t be used to help women from other states where abortion is illegal or severely restricted come to California to get the procedure.A dozen other bills are pending that would support those seeking and providing abortions such as allowing some nurse practitioners perform abortions without the supervision of a doctor and block disclosure of abortion-related medical records to out-of-state entities.TopicsCaliforniaAbortionRoe v WadeHealthUS politicsLaw (US)newsReuse this content More

  • in

    ‘We will fight like hell’: US western states band together to protect abortion rights

    ‘We will fight like hell’: US western states band together to protect abortion rightsCalifornia, Oregon and Washington pledged to defend access and protect those seeking care as the US came to grips with losing Roe v Wade Democratic state governors of California, Oregon and Washington issued a new commitment to enshrine abortion rights across the west coast on Friday, as the US grappled with the supreme court’s ruling removing the federal right to abortion. Calling their states a “a safe haven for all people seeking abortions and other reproductive health care services”, California governor Gavin Newsom, Oregon governor Kate Brown, and Washington governor Jay Inslee pledged to defend access to reproductive healthcare and protect those who cross their borders from other states seeking care.They vowed to hamper out-of-state investigations or efforts to target those who receive services in their states, including barring local law enforcement from cooperating with outside agencies.‘Abortion returns to the states’: US attorneys general react to Roe v Wade rulingRead more“California has banded together with Oregon and Washington to stand up for women, and to protect access to reproductive health care,” Newsom said in a statement. “We will not sit on the sidelines and allow patients who seek reproductive care in our states or the doctors that provide that care to be intimidated with criminal prosecution. We refuse to go back and we will fight like hell to protect our rights and our values.”The supreme court decision on Friday to overturn Roe v Wade, the landmark decision that had protected reproductive rights in the US for nearly 5 decades, paves the way for a slew of states that intend to roll back abortion rights. At least 26 states are expected to ban abortion immediately or as soon as is practical after the decision, affecting 40 million people. Those who are less affluent, the young, Black and brown people, and those with children already are likely to bear the brunt of those rollbacks.But even in the liberal states where leaders have consistently voiced strong commitments to reproductive rights and rebuked the Republican-led states that led the charge to dismantle them, key challenges to abortion access – and battlegrounds – remain.“The threat to patient access and privacy has never been more dangerous,” said Inslee, the Washington governor, noting that even as his state continues to uphold abortion rights, Republicans in the state have introduced at least four dozen billsover the last six years aimed at rolling them back. “The right of choice should not depend on which party holds the majority, but that’s where we find ourselves,” Inslee added.Even in California, where abortion access is backed by statute and where legislators are working to enshrine reproductive freedoms into the state’s constitution, some residents still face significant barriers to get care. So-called “access deserts” cover large swaths of the state, especially in more conservative and rural areas including the central valley and in the far north. In 40% of California counties there isn’t a single clinic that provides abortions. As the state positions itself as a sanctuary for others, some advocates are concerned that residents may struggle to find the care they need.“As more and more people come in from out of state seeking abortions, it’s going to put more pressure on a system that’s already strained,” said Laura Jiménez, the executive director of California Latinas for Reproductive Justice.Already, some California residents have to travel hours across their county lines in order to receive care.High costs have also hampered access. Even without transportation expenses, an abortion can run hundreds of dollars for those without insurance. Many, especially those with complicated cases or who are farther along in their pregnancies, aren’t able to afford the costs or coordinate travel quickly. Language barriers and misinformation have only complicated the issues, spurring fear of criminalization and deportation that stops immigrants without legal status from seeking the care they need.Still, important investments have been made in the three states to shore up their pledges, including a $125m reproductive health package proposed by Newsom in California to expand access. Oregon’s Reproductive Health Equity Act offers free reproductive healthcare to some Oregonians and a new bill signed by Inslee this year protects professionals in the state who provide abortions from out-of-state prosecution. Advocates say there’s still a lot more work to be done.Abortion deserts: America’s new geography of access to care – mappedRead moreReproductive rights are expected to be a key issue in future elections in these states and across the country. Already, Democratic lawmakers have used the supreme court’s decision to fundraise, signifying the fight that lays ahead. Public opinion is on their side – roughly 85% of Americans support abortion access. But for now, the states along the west coast will continue to offer care and position themselves as a go-to destination.“Abortion is health care, and no matter who you are or where you come from, Oregon doesn’t turn away anyone seeking health care,” said Brown of Oregon, “For all the Americans today feeling scared, angry and disappointed – for everyone who needs an abortion and does not know where they can access safe reproductive health care: please know you are not alone, and the fight is not over.”TopicsAbortionRoe v WadeCaliforniaOregonWashington stateUS politicsUS supreme courtnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Adam Gray Will Face John Duarte in Central Valley Battleground

    A Democratic state assemblyman, Adam C. Gray, and a Republican businessman, John Duarte, are headed for a November congressional contest in a Central Valley region that leans Democratic but remains a perennial California battleground.The Associated Press on Wednesday called the top two 13th Congressional District spots for Mr. Gray and Mr. Duarte, after the primary election on June 8.The newly redrawn district will most likely be fiercely contested as Republicans consider the open seat one of their best chances to regain ground in the state.Mr. Gray, a moderate Democrat with the backing of the state party establishment, has emphasized his efforts to keep water access for farmers in the Central Valley.Mr. Duarte, who is president of his family nursery, has made water access for farmers a centerpiece of his campaign, too. He has been tapped as a “Young Gun” rising star by the national Republican Party.Although California is still by far the nation’s most populous state, it lost a House seat in the most recent round of redistricting because population growth has slowed to historic lows amid a housing crisis and a slowed flow of immigrants.Last year’s decennial redistricting, tied to the U.S. census, had a scrambling effect on California’s politics, sending many lawmakers in search of friendlier districts and leaving some seats, including the 13th Congressional District, without an incumbent.Representative Josh Harder, the Democrat who represents the area, decided to run in a nearby district surrounding Stockton after the longtime Democratic congressman there, Jerry McNerney, said he wouldn’t run again.The 13th Congressional District, which encompasses Merced County in California’s agricultural heartland, is mostly Latino and voted for President Biden in 2020 by a significant margin. But the Central Valley has historically been one of the state’s more conservative regions — it is home to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and former Representative Devin Nunes, a close associate of former President Donald J. Trump.Its status as the center of farmworker labor activism, as well as its dependence on water and the oil industry, has long complicated partisan politics there.Assemblyman Adam Gray at the California State Capitol in Sacramento last month.Rich Pedroncelli/Associated PressPhil Arballo, a Democrat, in 2020 challenged Mr. Nunes, who held his seat for nearly two decades before resigning from Congress to run the former president’s media company. Although Mr. Arballo lost, the race was competitive.He had hoped to parlay that momentum into a bid for the newly drawn open seat. But Mr. Arballo was a distant third. More

  • in

    After the election results in California, the left must organize and fight | Ben Davis

    After the election results in California, the left must organize and fightBen DavisProgressive movements that have built power in cities across the country are facing a well-financed backlash from entrenched interests they vowed to fix There are a few clear lessons from the recent primary elections in California. The first is that California is still a one-party state. The second is that once partisanship is removed in the eyes of voters, conservative forces have a lot of room to operate. Despite their failure at a federal level, conservative forces are on the move in California using a playbook that will be repeated across the country.In California’s top statewide races, Democrats easily finished with a large majority of votes across the board, with Republicans struggling to even approach 40% of the statewide vote. As recently as a decade ago, Republicans in California could threaten Democrats when they had an advantage in the national climate. Today, there’s effectively no threat of Republicans being involved in state-level governing. Republicans may pick up a few seats in California if there ends up being a massive Republican wave this fall, but they are still a defeated force at the federal and state level in all but a few pockets of California.The election did see some huge results which will have implications across the country, in particular on the municipal level. California represents the vanguard of a phenomenon of urban reaction. Progressive movements centered on racial justice, criminal justice reform, tenants’ rights and more have spent the last decade building power locally in cities across the country; these movements are now running into a serious and well-financed backlash from the entrenched interests they vowed to fix.This is most apparent in the successful recall of the progressive San Francisco district attorney, Chesa Boudin, but can also be seen in the first-place primary finish of the real estate developer and recent Republican Rick Caruso in the Los Angeles mayoral race, and the first-place primary finish of Los Angeles’s rogue sheriff, Alex Villanueva. This comes on the heels of Republican Ann Davison winning the Seattle city attorney election and as a number of other Republican-aligned candidates make headway in Democratic primaries and non-partisan municipal elections in a number of historically progressive cities. This election cycle is the first test case of how entrenched powers in cities react to threats.The recall of Boudin is instructive. The San Francisco power establishment had its sights on him from the day he won, and used a number of tactics to stymie and ultimately defeat him.The first prong is one we will see more and more as progressives try to enact their democratic mandates in municipal governments: a police work slowdown. Police in the United States have operated with impunity for decades, effectively isolated from democratic accountability to the communities they serve. In California in particular, police and sheriff departments have allegedly engaged in large-scale criminality, operating in many locales as gangs that terrorize the population or as occupying forces. When police see the threat of being held accountable to the public, they impose costs that protect their positions.This is an age-old tactic of conservative sections of the state when they feel threatened by elected progressive governments. After Boudin was elected, police in San Francisco stopped fully doing their jobs, a tactic used by the Baltimore police department after the death of Freddie Gray and the New York police department to punish Mayor Bill de Blasio. San Francisco now boasts a woeful clearance rate. Police efforts to sabotage Boudin went so far that the prosecutor had to rent a U-Haul to carry out a major arrest because the police refused to participate.The message to residents was clear: remove Boudin and stop efforts to exercise accountability or people won’t be safe.The second prong of the attack on Boudin came directly from capital. San Francisco is increasingly run by extremely wealthy tech oligarchs who can outspend any opposition by huge margins. Actually dealing with crime involves spending more on social programs and redistributing wealth downwards, anathema to the ultra-wealthy. Progressive prosecutors threaten a shift from prosecuting petty crime to enforcing regulations on businesses and the wealthy. The oligarchs can finance massive political campaigns, but they can also threaten capital flight and capital strikes, another age-old tactic to resist progressive government and democratic oversight.In the US and California in particular, a new wealthy class has been moving from suburbs to cities and displacing the urban working-class population. In San Francisco, billionaires and the ascendant class of wealthy tech workers moved into a city with all that urban life entails – noise, homelessness, people of many economic and racial backgrounds in close proximity, etc – and have responded by trying to turn the city into the suburbs. As the housing crisis worsens and cities become more wealthy and more unequal, we will see a sort of reverse of the white flight of the 1950s and 60s and the suburban tax revolts of the late 1970s, as the new urban ruling classes seek to instate a homogeneous society in place of the bustling, messy, diverse, cultured places they inherited.The final prong of the recall effort was a massive campaign by the media, which has ramped up around the country. Boudin’s tenure was marked by breathless coverage of crime and increasing media alarmism about the city becoming a war zone. Hundreds of articles have been written in San Francisco and elsewhere attributing rising crime to progressive prosecutors and criminal justice reform.This hysteria is largely evidence-free: crime has been rising nationwide at about the same rate, with no correlation whatsoever to progressive prosecutors or city governments. In fact, cities with Republican mayors and prosecutors are far more dangerous. Republican-governed Jacksonville, for example, is about the same size as San Francisco and has three times the murder rate. The media, however, has focused almost exclusively on progressive-run jurisdictions. In San Francisco, people were whipped into a frenzy, despite the fact that the city is vastly safer than it was for most of the previous 50 years.Boudin’s recall is the tip of the spear of reaction, rather than just one example of backlash against progressive governance. San Francisco is a unique city that, despite its left-leaning reputation, gave unique opportunities for conservative forces to move so aggressively. For one, Boudin only won in the first place with 36% of the vote, hardly a clear mandate. Indeed, the 40% who voted to retain him demonstrates that, if anything, he gained support over his tenure.In contrast, the handy re-election victories of progressive prosecutors Larry Krasner in Philadelphia and Kim Foxx in Chicago further demonstrate Boudin’s unique vulnerability. Krasner and Foxx both lost white voters, winning re-election on the back of large margins from the Latino and especially Black voters who together make up a majority of both their districts. In San Francisco, however, Black people and Latinos together make up just 20% of the population, with Black residents alone just 5% of residents.San Francisco is also vastly wealthier than most other American cities, leaving a much smaller base of people affected by policies that primarily harm poor and marginalized people. The election map shows that support for the recall was strongest in the wealthiest areas. In Philadelphia, someone seeing a homeless encampment on their way to work is likely to be a working-class person; in San Francisco, there’s a decent chance this person is a millionaire or even billionaire who will make their distaste everyone’s problem.There is much to learn in these results for progressives, but no clear path forward. How can institutions be made to actually respond to democratic leadership? How can the ultra-wealthy be counteracted? Can the left build an alternative media structure? There are no obvious answers, and, absent a plan, the forces of municipal conservative backlash will continue unabated.Unless activists, workers and tenants regroup, reflect and commit to organization and politics on a mass level, the results in California will be the first in a series that serve to further militarize cities, stratify them by class, and brutalize the most vulnerable. These results are a canary in the coalmine for anyone who wants thriving, diverse, equitable cities that are good places to live and work.
    Ben Davis works in political data in Washington DC. He worked on the data team for the Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign and is an active member of the Democratic Socialists of America
    TopicsUS politicsOpinionDemocratsRepublicansCaliforniaSan FranciscocommentReuse this content More