window.__IS_SSR__=true
window.__INITIAL_STATE__={
"attachmentsReducer": {
"audio_0": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_0",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background0.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_1": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_1",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background1.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_2": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_2",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background2.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_3": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_3",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background3.jpg"
}
}
},
"audio_4": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "audio_4",
"imgSizes": {
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/themes/KQED-unified/img/audio_bgs/background4.jpg"
}
}
},
"placeholder": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "placeholder",
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"height": 533,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"medium_large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-768x512.jpg",
"width": 768,
"height": 512,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-lrg": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-med": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"fd-sm": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-800x533.jpg",
"width": 800,
"height": 533,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xxsmall": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xsmall": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"small": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"xlarge": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1020x680.jpg",
"width": 1020,
"height": 680,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1-1920x1280.jpg",
"width": 1920,
"height": 1280,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-32": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 32,
"height": 32,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-50": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 50,
"height": 50,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-64": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 64,
"height": 64,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-96": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 96,
"height": 96,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"guest-author-128": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 128,
"height": 128,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"detail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-1333x1333-1-160x160.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 160,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/KQED-Default-Image-816638274-2000x1333-1.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
}
},
"news_12103408": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12103408",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12103408",
"found": true
},
"title": "CMVoterID",
"publishDate": 1791403327,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12103398,
"modified": 1791403360,
"caption": "From left, Cameron Winklevoss and Richard Uihlein. \r\n",
"credit": "Noam Galai/Getty Images and Uline Corporate Video",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/CMVoterID-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/CMVoterID-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/CMVoterID-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/CMVoterID-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/CMVoterID-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/CMVoterID-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/CMVoterID.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12074712": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12074712",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12074712",
"found": true
},
"title": "260226-GovRaceForum-56-BL_qed (1)",
"publishDate": 1772065791,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12074679,
"modified": 1772065814,
"caption": "Former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter speaks during a gubernatorial candidate forum at the UCSF Mission Bay campus in San Francisco on Jan. 26, 2026. ",
"credit": "Beth LaBerge/KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/02/260226-GovRaceForum-56-BL_qed-1-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/02/260226-GovRaceForum-56-BL_qed-1-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/02/260226-GovRaceForum-56-BL_qed-1-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/02/260226-GovRaceForum-56-BL_qed-1-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/02/260226-GovRaceForum-56-BL_qed-1-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/02/260226-GovRaceForum-56-BL_qed-1.jpg",
"width": 1999,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12103279": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12103279",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12103279",
"found": true
},
"title": "TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode 4-16",
"publishDate": 1791354069,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12103278,
"modified": 1791354108,
"caption": "Photo courtesy of the Office of Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi\n",
"credit": null,
"altTag": "Speaker Pelosi stands behind President Trump and in front of an American Flag during his State of the Union address, wearing a white suit. Her arms are outstretched and clapping at him.",
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-2000x1125.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1125,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-2000x1125.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1125,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-160x90.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 90,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-1536x864.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 864,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-2048x1152.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1152,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-2000x1125.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1125,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/TheSpeaker_Horizontal_Episode-4-16-scaled.jpg",
"width": 2560,
"height": 1440
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12062350": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12062350",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12062350",
"found": true
},
"title": "California Voters Head To Polls To Decide On Redistricting Through Prop 50",
"publishDate": 1761858649,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12062349,
"modified": 1761858649,
"caption": "WEST HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA - OCTOBER 27: A person walks past a sign pointing to a vote center during the in-person early voting period in California's Proposition 50 special election on October 27, 2025 in West Hollywood, California. California voters are casting their ballots in the redistricting measure which would redraw the state’s congressional districts in an effort to increase Democratic seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)",
"credit": null,
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-2000x1389.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1389,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-2000x1389.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1389,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-160x111.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 111,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-1536x1067.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1067,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-2048x1423.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1423,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-2000x1389.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1389,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/GettyImages-2243718109-scaled.jpg",
"width": 2560,
"height": 1779
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12095409": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12095409",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12095409",
"found": true
},
"title": "GettyImages-2274165178",
"publishDate": 1786741765,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12095408,
"modified": 1786741843,
"caption": "LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA- MAY 5: In this photo illustration, an official voter information guide mailed to a Southern California resident, ahead of a state primary election, photographed May 5, 2026 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo Illustration by Jay L Clendenin/Getty Images)",
"credit": null,
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-2000x1334.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1334,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-2000x1334.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1334,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-1536x1025.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1025,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-2048x1366.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1366,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-2000x1334.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1334,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-2274165178-scaled.jpg",
"width": 2560,
"height": 1708
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12103034": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12103034",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12103034",
"found": true
},
"title": "261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-9_qed",
"publishDate": 1791305775,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12102938,
"modified": 1791305795,
"caption": "Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.",
"credit": "Nina Glick/KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-9_qed-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-9_qed-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-9_qed-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-9_qed-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-9_qed-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-9_qed-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-9_qed.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12082113": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12082113",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12082113",
"found": true
},
"title": "023_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_TanyaYule_10092020_qed",
"publishDate": 1777661453,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12082074,
"modified": 1777661480,
"caption": "A San Francisco resident hands their mail-in ballot to USPS employee Elmer Padilla on Oct. 9, 2020.",
"credit": "Beth LaBerge/KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/023_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_TanyaYule_10092020_qed-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/023_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_TanyaYule_10092020_qed-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/023_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_TanyaYule_10092020_qed-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/023_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_TanyaYule_10092020_qed-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/023_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_TanyaYule_10092020_qed-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/023_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_TanyaYule_10092020_qed-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/023_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_TanyaYule_10092020_qed.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12096524": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12096524",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12096524",
"found": true
},
"title": "260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-07",
"publishDate": 1787590742,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1787591112,
"caption": "Angelica Torres holds her 5-month-old son Angel as her daughter Valentina works on a project for school in the kitchen of Torres’ mother’s home in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. Her mother helps out with childcare while Torres goes to work full-time.",
"credit": "Juliana Yamada for KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-07-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-07-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-07-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-07-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-07-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-07-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-07.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12101422": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12101422",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101422",
"found": true
},
"title": "WealthPortfolio",
"publishDate": 1790362884,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12101418,
"modified": 1790362956,
"caption": "Businessman and team analyzing financial statements and graphs.",
"credit": "nuttapong punna/iStock",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"medium": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-2000x1136.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1136,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"large": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-2000x1136.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1136,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-160x91.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 91,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-1536x873.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 873,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"2048x2048": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-2048x1164.jpg",
"width": 2048,
"height": 1164,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-2000x1136.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1136,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/WealthPortfolio.jpg",
"width": 2297,
"height": 1305
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12101278": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12101278",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101278",
"found": true
},
"title": "Voting Booths",
"publishDate": 1790280662,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12101275,
"modified": 1790280677,
"caption": "Voting booths at Hermosa Beach City Hall during California Primary",
"credit": "Daniel Sofer / hermosawave.net",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-160x106.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 106,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-1536x1021.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1021,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/iStock_000005814659_Large_qed.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1329
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12102917": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12102917",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102917",
"found": true
},
"title": "240612-SFMayoralDebate-14-BL_qed",
"publishDate": 1791229250,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12102904,
"modified": 1791244835,
"caption": "Manny Yekutiel, proprietor of the event space Manny’s, speaks before a San Francisco mayoral debate with candidates Asha Safaí, former Mayor Mark Farrell, Daniel Lurie, Mayor London Breed and Aaron Peskin at the Sydney Goldstein Theater on June 12, 2024.",
"credit": "Beth LaBerge/KQED",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/240612-SFMayoralDebate-14-BL_qed-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/240612-SFMayoralDebate-14-BL_qed-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/240612-SFMayoralDebate-14-BL_qed-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/240612-SFMayoralDebate-14-BL_qed-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/240612-SFMayoralDebate-14-BL_qed-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/240612-SFMayoralDebate-14-BL_qed-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/240612-SFMayoralDebate-14-BL_qed.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
},
"news_12099020": {
"type": "attachments",
"id": "news_12099020",
"meta": {
"index": "attachments_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12099020",
"found": true
},
"title": "GavinNewsomAI",
"publishDate": 1789064660,
"status": "inherit",
"parent": 12099017,
"modified": 1789080382,
"caption": "The move comes hours after a researcher’s resignation post has reignited fears about the direction of new technology. ",
"credit": "Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images",
"altTag": null,
"description": null,
"imgSizes": {
"thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GavinNewsomAI-160x107.jpg",
"width": 160,
"height": 107,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"1536x1536": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GavinNewsomAI-1536x1024.jpg",
"width": 1536,
"height": 1024,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"post-thumbnail": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GavinNewsomAI-672x372.jpg",
"width": 672,
"height": 372,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"twentyfourteen-full-width": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GavinNewsomAI-1038x576.jpg",
"width": 1038,
"height": 576,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-wide": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GavinNewsomAI-1200x675.jpg",
"width": 1200,
"height": 675,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"npr-cds-square": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GavinNewsomAI-600x600.jpg",
"width": 600,
"height": 600,
"mimeType": "image/jpeg"
},
"kqedFullSize": {
"file": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/GavinNewsomAI.jpg",
"width": 2000,
"height": 1333
}
},
"isLoading": false,
"fetchFailed": false
}
},
"audioPlayerReducer": {
"postId": "stream_live",
"isPaused": true,
"isPlaying": false,
"pfsActive": false,
"pledgeModalIsOpen": true,
"playerDrawerIsOpen": false,
"liveAudioPlayStartedAt": 0,
"liveAudioPlayContext": ""
},
"authorsReducer": {
"byline_news_12103398": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_12103398",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_12103398",
"name": "Nadia Lathan, CalMatters",
"isLoading": false
},
"byline_news_12102760": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "byline_news_12102760",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"slug": "byline_news_12102760",
"name": "Felicia Mello, Berkeleyside",
"isLoading": false
},
"ohubertallen": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "102",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "102",
"found": true
},
"name": "Olivia Allen-Price",
"firstName": "Olivia",
"lastName": "Allen-Price",
"slug": "ohubertallen",
"email": "oallenprice@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Senior Editor",
"bio": "Olivia Allen-Price is senior editor and host of the award-winning Bay Curious podcast. Prior to joining KQED in 2013, Olivia worked at The Baltimore Sun and The Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk, Va. She holds degrees in journalism and political science from Elon University. Her work has earned awards from the Society of Professional Journalists, the Hearst Foundation and Hearken. She loves to talk about running and curly hair.\r\n\r\nFollow: \u003ca href=\"https://twitter.com/oallenprice\">@oallenprice\u003c/a>\r\nEmail: \u003ca href=\"mailto:oallenprice@kqed.org\">oallenprice@kqed.org\u003c/a>",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/07f7803c1f6be56f3be58ef276dfa64dce898502e0554408ef4858451a8294f7?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "oallenprice",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
},
{
"site": "pop",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
},
{
"site": "bayareabites",
"roles": [
"contributor"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Olivia Allen-Price | KQED",
"description": "Senior Editor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/07f7803c1f6be56f3be58ef276dfa64dce898502e0554408ef4858451a8294f7?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/07f7803c1f6be56f3be58ef276dfa64dce898502e0554408ef4858451a8294f7?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/ohubertallen"
},
"gmarzorati": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "227",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "227",
"found": true
},
"name": "Guy Marzorati",
"firstName": "Guy",
"lastName": "Marzorati",
"slug": "gmarzorati",
"email": "gmarzorati@KQED.org",
"display_author_email": true,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Correspondent",
"bio": "Guy Marzorati is a correspondent on KQED's California Politics and Government Desk, based in San Jose. A graduate of Santa Clara University, Guy joined KQED in 2013. He reports on state and local politics and produces KQED's digital voter guide.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e7038b8dbfd55b104369b76b1cd0b9de?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "guymarzorati",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "elections",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Guy Marzorati | KQED",
"description": "Correspondent",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e7038b8dbfd55b104369b76b1cd0b9de?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e7038b8dbfd55b104369b76b1cd0b9de?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/gmarzorati"
},
"katrinaschwartz": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "234",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "234",
"found": true
},
"name": "Katrina Schwartz",
"firstName": "Katrina",
"lastName": "Schwartz",
"slug": "katrinaschwartz",
"email": "kschwartz@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Producer",
"bio": "Katrina Schwartz is a journalist based in San Francisco. She's worked at KPCC public radio in LA and has reported on air and online for KQED since 2010. She covered how teaching and learning is changing for MindShift between 2012 and 2020. She is the co-host of the MindShift podcast and now produces KQED's Bay Curious podcast.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/edb4ee79070447a018538c9aae6eeecf28786515b8a0c30e43b6b7dce5aa44c8?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "kschwart",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "mindshift",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Katrina Schwartz | KQED",
"description": "Producer",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/edb4ee79070447a018538c9aae6eeecf28786515b8a0c30e43b6b7dce5aa44c8?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/edb4ee79070447a018538c9aae6eeecf28786515b8a0c30e43b6b7dce5aa44c8?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/katrinaschwartz"
},
"scottshafer": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "255",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "255",
"found": true
},
"name": "Scott Shafer",
"firstName": "Scott",
"lastName": "Shafer",
"slug": "scottshafer",
"email": "sshafer@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Scott Shafer is a senior editor with the KQED Politics and Government desk. He is co-host of Political Breakdown, the award-winning radio show and podcast with a personal take on the world of politics. Scott came to KQED in 1998 to host the statewide\u003cem> California Report\u003c/em>. Prior to that he had extended stints in politics and government\u003cem>.\u003c/em> He uses that inside experience at KQED in his, reporting, hosting and analysis for the politics desk. Scott collaborated \u003cem>Political Breakdown a\u003c/em>nd on \u003cem>The Political Mind of Jerry Brown, \u003c/em>an eight-part series about the life and extraordinary political career of the former governor. For fun, he plays water polo with the San Francisco Tsunami.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a62ebae45b79d7aed1a39a0e3bf68104?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "scottshafer",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Scott Shafer | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a62ebae45b79d7aed1a39a0e3bf68104?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a62ebae45b79d7aed1a39a0e3bf68104?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/scottshafer"
},
"mlagos": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "3239",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "3239",
"found": true
},
"name": "Marisa Lagos",
"firstName": "Marisa",
"lastName": "Lagos",
"slug": "mlagos",
"email": "mlagos@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Marisa Lagos is a correspondent for KQED’s California Politics and Government Desk and co-hosts the award-winning show and podcast, Political Breakdown. At KQED, Lagos also conducts reporting, analysis and investigations into state, local and national politics for radio, TV, online and onstage. In 2022, she and co-host, Scott Shafer, moderated the only gubernatorial debate in California. In 2020, the \u003ci>Washington Post\u003c/i> named her one of the top political journalists in California; she was nominated for a Peabody and won several other awards for her work investigating the 2017 California wildfires. She has worked at the \u003ci>San Francisco Chronicle\u003c/i>, \u003ci>San Francisco Examiner\u003c/i> and \u003ci>Los Angeles Times\u003c/i>. A UC Santa Barbara graduate, she lives in San Francisco with her two sons and husband.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a261a0d3696fc066871ef96b85b5e7d2?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "@mlagos",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Marisa Lagos | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a261a0d3696fc066871ef96b85b5e7d2?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/a261a0d3696fc066871ef96b85b5e7d2?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/mlagos"
},
"ecruzguevarra": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "8654",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "8654",
"found": true
},
"name": "Ericka Cruz Guevarra",
"firstName": "Ericka",
"lastName": "Cruz Guevarra",
"slug": "ecruzguevarra",
"email": "ecruzguevarra@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": true,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "Producer, The Bay Podcast",
"bio": "Ericka Cruz Guevarra is host of \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/podcasts/thebay\">\u003cem>The Bay\u003c/em>\u003c/a> podcast at KQED. Before host, she was the show’s producer. Her work in that capacity includes a three-part reported series on policing in Vallejo, which won a 2020 excellence in journalism award from the Society of Professional Journalists. Ericka has worked as a breaking news reporter at Oregon Public Broadcasting, helped produce the Code Switch podcast, and was KQED’s inaugural Raul Ramirez Diversity Fund intern. She’s also an alumna of NPR’s Next Generation Radio program. Send her an email if you have strong feelings about whether Fairfield and Suisun City are the Bay. Ericka is represented by SAG-AFTRA.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/accefc1de4bafc7e234b69bcb9b6f6536c130fd84709bc3069ef11a78787e1bb?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "NotoriousECG",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "arts",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor",
"manage_categories"
]
},
{
"site": "futureofyou",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "stateofhealth",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"subscriber"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Ericka Cruz Guevarra | KQED",
"description": "Producer, The Bay Podcast",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/accefc1de4bafc7e234b69bcb9b6f6536c130fd84709bc3069ef11a78787e1bb?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/accefc1de4bafc7e234b69bcb9b6f6536c130fd84709bc3069ef11a78787e1bb?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/ecruzguevarra"
},
"amontecillo": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11649",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11649",
"found": true
},
"name": "Alan Montecillo",
"firstName": "Alan",
"lastName": "Montecillo",
"slug": "amontecillo",
"email": "amontecillo@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Alan Montecillo is the senior editor of \u003cem>\u003ca href=\"http://kqed.org/thebay\">The Bay\u003c/a>, \u003c/em> KQED's local news podcast. Before moving to the Bay Area, he worked as a senior talk show producer for WILL in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois and at Oregon Public Broadcasting in Portland, Oregon. He has won journalism awards from the Society of Professional Journalists Northern California, the Public Media Journalists Association, The Signal Awards, and has also received a regional Edward R. Murrow award. Alan is a Filipino American from Hong Kong and a graduate of Reed College.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/268f53a2066899ea9efdd8a5900218b17c822d9862cbc9326cccec53ef41d349?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "alanmontecillo",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor",
"manage_categories"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Alan Montecillo | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/268f53a2066899ea9efdd8a5900218b17c822d9862cbc9326cccec53ef41d349?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/268f53a2066899ea9efdd8a5900218b17c822d9862cbc9326cccec53ef41d349?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/amontecillo"
},
"amarkowitz": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11660",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11660",
"found": true
},
"name": "Ariella Markowitz",
"firstName": "Ariella",
"lastName": "Markowitz",
"slug": "amarkowitz",
"email": "amarkowitz@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Ariella is a former intern for the California Report Magazine. Before that, she helped mobilize freelance journalists with Association of Independents in Radio (AIR) and made radio features for KALW. Ariella loves investigative reporting, personal stories that interrogate power, and spicy vegan cooking.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/7076c77064fecef602a2c779f2b9e1d33cb6f9b5fa13542bd1a6e2846a7c85a9?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "ariellaudio",
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "forum",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "perspectives",
"roles": [
"administrator"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Ariella Markowitz | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/7076c77064fecef602a2c779f2b9e1d33cb6f9b5fa13542bd1a6e2846a7c85a9?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/7076c77064fecef602a2c779f2b9e1d33cb6f9b5fa13542bd1a6e2846a7c85a9?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/amarkowitz"
},
"ibloom": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11805",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11805",
"found": true
},
"name": "Izzy Bloom",
"firstName": "Izzy",
"lastName": "Bloom",
"slug": "ibloom",
"email": "ibloom@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Reporter & Producer",
"bio": "Izzy is a reporter and producer on KQED's California Politics & Government Desk. She joined the desk in 2024 to produce Political Breakdown, covering local and national elections and attending the RNC and DNC in Milwaukee and Chicago. \r\n\r\nBefore that, Izzy was a producer on The California Report and reported long-form stories for The California Report Magazine. She was a finalist for the Third Coast/Richard H. Driehaus Foundation Competition and was awarded for her reporting on indigenous land back by the Society of Professional Journalists. Izzy received her master's in journalism from the University of California, Berkeley.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/cc4d272ca430783ee1a8efac470a6b1e0fdd082c3beb61da019801d0ff751c8c?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
},
{
"site": "perspectives",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Izzy Bloom | KQED",
"description": "KQED Reporter & Producer",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/cc4d272ca430783ee1a8efac470a6b1e0fdd082c3beb61da019801d0ff751c8c?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/cc4d272ca430783ee1a8efac470a6b1e0fdd082c3beb61da019801d0ff751c8c?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/ibloom"
},
"daisynguyen": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11829",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11829",
"found": true
},
"name": "Daisy Nguyen",
"firstName": "Daisy",
"lastName": "Nguyen",
"slug": "daisynguyen",
"email": "daisynguyen@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": true,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "I have covered early childhood education and child care for KQED since 2022. I focus on policies aimed at increasing access to early care and education and how they shape individual lives. I've been a journalist for more than two decades, with most of that time devoted to covering breaking news throughout California for The Associated Press. I grew up in San Francisco and studied at UC Davis and Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism. I live in Oakland with my husband and two kids.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/2da2127c27f7143b53ebd419800fd55f?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": "https://www.linkedin.com/in/daisynguyen/",
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Daisy Nguyen | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/2da2127c27f7143b53ebd419800fd55f?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/2da2127c27f7143b53ebd419800fd55f?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/daisynguyen"
},
"sjohnson": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11840",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11840",
"found": true
},
"name": "Sydney Johnson",
"firstName": "Sydney",
"lastName": "Johnson",
"slug": "sjohnson",
"email": "sjohnson@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Reporter",
"bio": "Sydney Johnson is a general assignment reporter at KQED. She previously reported on public health and city government at the San Francisco Examiner, and before that, she covered statewide education policy for EdSource. Her reporting has won multiple local, state and national awards. Sydney is a graduate of the University of California, Berkeley and lives in San Francisco.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/97855f2719b72ad6190b7c535fe642c8?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": "sydneyfjohnson",
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Sydney Johnson | KQED",
"description": "KQED Reporter",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/97855f2719b72ad6190b7c535fe642c8?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/97855f2719b72ad6190b7c535fe642c8?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/sjohnson"
},
"kdebenedetti": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11913",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11913",
"found": true
},
"name": "Katie DeBenedetti",
"firstName": "Katie",
"lastName": "DeBenedetti",
"slug": "kdebenedetti",
"email": "kdebenedetti@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news",
"science"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": "Katie DeBenedetti is a digital reporter covering daily news for the Express Desk. Prior to joining KQED as a culture reporting intern in January 2024, she covered education and city government for the Napa Valley Register.",
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/6e31073cb8f7e4214ab03f42771d0f45?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "science",
"roles": [
"author"
]
},
{
"site": "liveblog",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Katie DeBenedetti | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/6e31073cb8f7e4214ab03f42771d0f45?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/6e31073cb8f7e4214ab03f42771d0f45?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/kdebenedetti"
},
"gglueck": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "11946",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "11946",
"found": true
},
"name": "Gabriela Glueck",
"firstName": "Gabriela",
"lastName": "Glueck",
"slug": "gglueck",
"email": "gglueck@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [
"news"
],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": null,
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ec62b7e3f7727ce1070cc7046dde80271d1e63cf2178d6194f68bb8d1440f841?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"editor"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Gabriela Glueck | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ec62b7e3f7727ce1070cc7046dde80271d1e63cf2178d6194f68bb8d1440f841?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ec62b7e3f7727ce1070cc7046dde80271d1e63cf2178d6194f68bb8d1440f841?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/gglueck"
},
"praghunath": {
"type": "authors",
"id": "12031",
"meta": {
"index": "authors_1716337520",
"id": "12031",
"found": true
},
"name": "Padmini Raghunath",
"firstName": "Padmini",
"lastName": "Raghunath",
"slug": "praghunath",
"email": "praghunath@kqed.org",
"display_author_email": false,
"staff_mastheads": [],
"title": "KQED Contributor",
"bio": null,
"avatar": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b596798b11518c7f968bcccc01ee39700147f48bec38ed04966851cdc26b543f?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twitter": null,
"bluesky": null,
"facebook": null,
"instagram": null,
"linkedin": null,
"sites": [
{
"site": "news",
"roles": [
"author"
]
}
],
"headData": {
"title": "Padmini Raghunath | KQED",
"description": "KQED Contributor",
"ogImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b596798b11518c7f968bcccc01ee39700147f48bec38ed04966851cdc26b543f?s=600&d=blank&r=g",
"twImgSrc": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b596798b11518c7f968bcccc01ee39700147f48bec38ed04966851cdc26b543f?s=600&d=blank&r=g"
},
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/author/praghunath"
}
},
"pagesReducer": {
"news_category_politics": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_13",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "13",
"score": 12.010284
},
"name": "Politics",
"slug": "politics",
"taxonomy": "category",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Politics | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 13,
"isLoading": false,
"title": "Politics",
"pageMeta": {
"site": "news",
"WpPageTemplate": "page-topic-editorial",
"currentPage": 1
},
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "kqed/post-list",
"attrs": {
"layout": "cardArticle2",
"query": "posts/news?category=politics",
"seeMore": false,
"paginated": true,
"page": 1
}
},
{
"blockName": "kqed/ad"
}
]
}
},
"pfsSessionReducer": {},
"postsReducer": {
"stream_live": {
"type": "live",
"id": "stream_live",
"audioUrl": "https://streams.kqed.org/kqedradio",
"title": "Live Stream",
"excerpt": "Live Stream information currently unavailable.",
"link": "/radio",
"featImg": "",
"label": {
"name": "KQED Live",
"link": "/"
}
},
"stream_kqedNewscast": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "stream_kqedNewscast",
"audioUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/.stream/anon/radio/RDnews/newscast.mp3?_=1",
"title": "KQED Newscast",
"featImg": "",
"label": {
"name": "88.5 FM",
"link": "/"
}
},
"news_12103398": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12103398",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12103398",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791404203000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "why-are-out-of-state-billionaires-funding-a-california-voter-id-measure",
"title": "Why Are Out-of-State Billionaires Funding a California Voter ID Measure?",
"publishDate": 1791404203,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Why Are Out-of-State Billionaires Funding a California Voter ID Measure? | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\u003cp>\u003c!-- Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ -->\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This story was originally published by \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/\">CalMatters\u003c/a>. \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/subscribe-to-calmatters/\">Sign up\u003c/a> for their newsletters.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Want to know who’s who in Republican politics? Look no further than the megadonors bankrolling \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California\u003c/a>’s voter ID initiative.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Illinois billionaire packing supply magnate Richard Uihlein, who has poured tens of millions of dollars into conservative causes, has contributed $17 million to the campaign for \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/california-voter-guide-2026/proposition-39-voter-id/\">Proposition 39\u003c/a>, a GOP-backed ballot measure to require voters to show a driver’s license or other government ID to vote.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Uihlein’s involvement and that of other deep-pocketed Republican donors is a signal that conservatives view Prop. 39 as a test of support for future battleground states in the broader push by President Donald Trump to tighten voter restrictions.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Uihlein is joined by Southern California businessman Steven Bray, who loaned the campaign more than $3 million and gave $50,000 outright. The right-wing political group \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/03/california-republican-endorsements/\">Reform California\u003c/a>, tech entrepreneurs Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss and former Robert F. Kennedy Jr. presidential running mate Nicole Shanahan are also major donors. Combined, they have helped the campaign rake in more than $28 million — $11 million more than their opponents a month from Election Day.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>[ad fullwidth]\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Prop. 39’s supporters argue that requiring ID at polling places will ensure California’s elections are secure, and say the mandate is no different from needing an ID to fly on a plane or buy alcohol. Proponents also point out that 36 states request or require voters to show some form of identification at the polls, according to the \u003ca href=\"https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id\">National Conference of State Legislatures\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California voters currently need a driver’s license and Social Security number to register to vote but not when they cast their ballots. If Prop. 39 passes, voters who mail their ballots would have to write the last four digits of their Social Security or other government-issued number on their ballots.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12095745\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12095745\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/251030-BayAreaVoters-06-BL_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/251030-BayAreaVoters-06-BL_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/251030-BayAreaVoters-06-BL_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/251030-BayAreaVoters-06-BL_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">A voter is given a sticker after dropping his ballot at City Hall in San Francisco on Oct. 30, 2025, ahead of the statewide special election. \u003ccite>(Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>It’s a long-awaited moment for the state’s weak Republican Party which has fought for decades to put a voter ID measure on the ballot in deep blue California.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Assemblymember \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/legislators/carl-demaio-161014\">Carl DeMaio\u003c/a>, a Republican, created Reform California and is spearheading the initiative. The freshman San Diego lawmaker’s group funded the ballot operation that collected more than a million signatures to qualify the measure after similar proposals failed in the Democratic-controlled Legislature.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Common Cause and other voting rights groups that oppose the measure fear Prop. 39 would unnecessarily block from voting citizens who can’t find or don’t have a government-issued ID. They argue that this would disproportionately impact, and unfairly penalize, people who recently moved, changed their last name or are low income — and other groups who historically have supported Democrats.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Civil rights advocates also argue the measure is unnecessary because voter fraud is rare.[aside postID=news_12103195 hero='https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/02/260226-GovRaceForum-56-BL_qed-1.jpg']“You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to commit voter fraud in a U.S. election,” California League of Women Voters executive director Jenny Farrell said. “There’s no need to add on these additional burdens and security checkpoints in California.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Despite numerous studies showing there is \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/voter-fraud-election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-7fcb6f134e528fee8237c7601db3328f\">no widespread evidence\u003c/a> of voter fraud in U.S. elections, Claremont McKenna College political scientist John Pitney said such claims have circulated for decades in far-right circles.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Attempts to constrict voter laws through ballot measures have increased in some states ever since the expansion of voting rights to African Americans during the Civil Rights Movement.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But fears about voter fraud accelerated during the first Trump administration when the president falsely claimed the 2020 election was stolen. Shortly after, DeMaio and other GOP lawmakers introduced unsuccessful bills to tighten voter restrictions before he pivoted to orchestrating a citizen-led ballot initiative last year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Recently Trump has promoted the idea that large numbers of undocumented people are voting, for which there isn’t any evidence,” Pitney said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure>\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://calmatters.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/030326_Voter-ID-Presser_FG_CM_08-1024x682.jpg\" alt=\"A lawmaker, wearing a black suit with a striped yellow tie, stands behind a lectern while surrounded by people holding blue and yellow signs that say "REQUIRE VOTER ID."\" />\u003cfigcaption>Assemblymember Carl DeMaio announces that supporters of the CA Voter ID Initiative will submit more than 1.3 million signatures to qualify the measure for the November 2026 ballot during a press conference at the west steps of the state Capitol in Sacramento on March 3, 2026. Photo by Fred Greaves for CalMatters\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Democrats bankrolling the opposition to Prop. 39 are also a who’s who of California politics.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The state Democratic Party is by far the largest contributor at nearly $5.5 million, followed by the Sonoma-area Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria with $2 million.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Longtime Democratic donors Patty Quillin, a film producer and wife of Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, and Quinn Delaney, a real estate investor and philanthropist, have each pitched in $1.5 million. Labor heavyweights such as the Service Employees International Union have contributed $1 million.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Democratic gubernatorial candidate \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/tag/xavier-becerra/\">Xavier Becerra\u003c/a> and Democratic Assembly Speaker \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/legislators/robert-rivas-165041\">Robert Rivas\u003c/a> have created a joint committee to raise money for the No campaign and U.S. Sen Alex Padilla is stumping at events.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Nearly 90% of Californians now vote by mail, according to the \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/historical-absentee\">secretary of state’s office\u003c/a>. That means the vast majority of voters would be required to write their Social Security or driver’s license number on their ballot should the initiative pass.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Many people aren’t going to be comfortable with that, No on 39 campaign spokesperson Tenoch Flores said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This is about creating new avenues to reject valid mail ballots,” Flores said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Yes on 39” spokesperson Meredith Shields told CalMatters that no one from the campaign could be made available for an interview. DeMaio declined an interview with CalMatters for this story. Uihlein did not respond to phone calls and emails requesting comment.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>The biggest donor\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Megadonor Uihlein and his wife, founders of the Wisconsin-based packaging company Uline, have poured millions into the Restoration of America PAC, a super PAC that frequently bankrolls Republican candidates in Illinois and Wisconsin. The Uihleins have \u003ca href=\"https://www.fec.gov/data/individual-contributions/?committee_id=C00571588&contributor_name=uihlein&two_year_transaction_period=2026\">donated $35 million to the PAC\u003c/a> this year alone, and Prop. 39 is the latest target in their effort to fund agenda-setting conservative causes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Shanahan, an attorney and the former wife of Google executive Sergey Brin, has funneled $370,000 into the Yes campaign, while the Winklevoss brothers have each contributed $250,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The interest from the ultra-wealthy in Prop. 39 is a sign that the GOP could be looking to replicate a similar playbook in toss-up states, Sonoma State University political science Professor David McCuan said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Republican proponents want to see how well or poorly voter ID does in Democratic-heavy California. If it does better than expected, that might mean a similar ballot measure could be fairly popular in more moderate battleground states, such as Michigan,Wisconsin or Pennsylvania.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“There is a spillover effect if you do better than expected, even if you lose,” McCuan said.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>Election security becomes about Trump\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Several Republican states moved to expand voter restrictions after the 2020 election, including Wyoming, Kentucky and Oklahoma. And while voter sentiment toward Trump is at historic lows, the GOP was surprisingly successful at getting the voter ID measure on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The “Yes on 39” TV campaign has \u003ca href=\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts64oxA4neQ\" data-type=\"link\" data-=\"\">begun airing ads\u003c/a> distancing the measure’s supporters from Trump, while the No campaign released an \u003ca href=\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjk5YyP7FYM\">ad airing in the Bay Area\u003c/a> featuring images of Trump and characterizations of Prop. 39 as a “power grab.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12101931\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12101931\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-scaled-e1791403746790.jpg\" alt=\"People in suits present at a podium surrounded by signs that read "Require Voter ID."\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Sen. Tony Strickland speaks at the Riverside County Registrar of Voters on Monday, March 2, 2026, for a press conference highlighting voter signatures in favor of placing a voter ID measure on the November ballot. \u003ccite>(Anjali Sharif-Paul/MediaNews Group/The Sun via Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>It’ll likely still be a tough road ahead for the Yes campaign. The default position for most voters is “no” on ballot propositions, meaning supporters of the measure will have to persuade enough voters to agree with them.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>An April poll by the \u003ca href=\"https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2d964377\">UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies\u003c/a> showed Californians broadly support requiring voters to present identification at the polls, but it found that support dipped below 50% when respondents were given specific details about the measure, such as that it’s meant to combat alleged voter fraud. A \u003ca href=\"https://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-september-2026/\">Public Policy Institute of California\u003c/a> poll in September found support for Prop. 39 has dropped to 43%.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>While this could be effective at turning out liberal voters, it’s unclear how even a hot-button issue will be enough to get Republicans out in a midterm election cycle with an unpopular president.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s hard to pass a red-coded measure in a blue wave election,” Pitney said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This article was \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/10/california-election-voter-id-proposition-39/\">originally published on CalMatters\u003c/a> and was republished under the \u003ca href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/\">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives\u003c/a> license.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [],
"excerpt": "Republican megadonors are boosting California’s voter ID measure in the hopes its success, or failure, can reveal how similar measures can perform in more moderate states.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791404203,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 37,
"wordCount": 1485
},
"headData": {
"title": "Why Are Out-of-State Billionaires Funding a California Voter ID Measure? | KQED",
"description": "Republican megadonors are boosting California’s voter ID measure in the hopes its success, or failure, can reveal how similar measures can perform in more moderate states.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Why Are Out-of-State Billionaires Funding a California Voter ID Measure?",
"datePublished": "2026-10-07T13:16:43-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-07T13:16:43-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 13,
"slug": "politics",
"name": "Politics"
},
"source": "CalMatters",
"sourceUrl": "https://calmatters.org/",
"sticky": false,
"nprByline": "Nadia Lathan, CalMatters",
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12103398",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"showOnAuthorArchivePages": "No",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12103398/why-are-out-of-state-billionaires-funding-a-california-voter-id-measure",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003cp>\u003c!-- Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ -->\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This story was originally published by \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/\">CalMatters\u003c/a>. \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/subscribe-to-calmatters/\">Sign up\u003c/a> for their newsletters.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Want to know who’s who in Republican politics? Look no further than the megadonors bankrolling \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California\u003c/a>’s voter ID initiative.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Illinois billionaire packing supply magnate Richard Uihlein, who has poured tens of millions of dollars into conservative causes, has contributed $17 million to the campaign for \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/california-voter-guide-2026/proposition-39-voter-id/\">Proposition 39\u003c/a>, a GOP-backed ballot measure to require voters to show a driver’s license or other government ID to vote.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Uihlein’s involvement and that of other deep-pocketed Republican donors is a signal that conservatives view Prop. 39 as a test of support for future battleground states in the broader push by President Donald Trump to tighten voter restrictions.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Uihlein is joined by Southern California businessman Steven Bray, who loaned the campaign more than $3 million and gave $50,000 outright. The right-wing political group \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/03/california-republican-endorsements/\">Reform California\u003c/a>, tech entrepreneurs Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss and former Robert F. Kennedy Jr. presidential running mate Nicole Shanahan are also major donors. Combined, they have helped the campaign rake in more than $28 million — $11 million more than their opponents a month from Election Day.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "ad",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"label": "fullwidth"
},
"numeric": [
"fullwidth"
]
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Prop. 39’s supporters argue that requiring ID at polling places will ensure California’s elections are secure, and say the mandate is no different from needing an ID to fly on a plane or buy alcohol. Proponents also point out that 36 states request or require voters to show some form of identification at the polls, according to the \u003ca href=\"https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id\">National Conference of State Legislatures\u003c/a>.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>California voters currently need a driver’s license and Social Security number to register to vote but not when they cast their ballots. If Prop. 39 passes, voters who mail their ballots would have to write the last four digits of their Social Security or other government-issued number on their ballots.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12095745\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12095745\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/251030-BayAreaVoters-06-BL_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/251030-BayAreaVoters-06-BL_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/251030-BayAreaVoters-06-BL_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/251030-BayAreaVoters-06-BL_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">A voter is given a sticker after dropping his ballot at City Hall in San Francisco on Oct. 30, 2025, ahead of the statewide special election. \u003ccite>(Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>It’s a long-awaited moment for the state’s weak Republican Party which has fought for decades to put a voter ID measure on the ballot in deep blue California.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Assemblymember \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/legislators/carl-demaio-161014\">Carl DeMaio\u003c/a>, a Republican, created Reform California and is spearheading the initiative. The freshman San Diego lawmaker’s group funded the ballot operation that collected more than a million signatures to qualify the measure after similar proposals failed in the Democratic-controlled Legislature.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Common Cause and other voting rights groups that oppose the measure fear Prop. 39 would unnecessarily block from voting citizens who can’t find or don’t have a government-issued ID. They argue that this would disproportionately impact, and unfairly penalize, people who recently moved, changed their last name or are low income — and other groups who historically have supported Democrats.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Civil rights advocates also argue the measure is unnecessary because voter fraud is rare.\u003c/p>\u003c/div>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "component",
"content": "",
"name": "aside",
"attributes": {
"named": {
"postid": "news_12103195",
"hero": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/02/260226-GovRaceForum-56-BL_qed-1.jpg",
"label": ""
},
"numeric": []
}
},
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>“You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to commit voter fraud in a U.S. election,” California League of Women Voters executive director Jenny Farrell said. “There’s no need to add on these additional burdens and security checkpoints in California.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Despite numerous studies showing there is \u003ca href=\"https://apnews.com/article/voter-fraud-election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-7fcb6f134e528fee8237c7601db3328f\">no widespread evidence\u003c/a> of voter fraud in U.S. elections, Claremont McKenna College political scientist John Pitney said such claims have circulated for decades in far-right circles.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Attempts to constrict voter laws through ballot measures have increased in some states ever since the expansion of voting rights to African Americans during the Civil Rights Movement.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>But fears about voter fraud accelerated during the first Trump administration when the president falsely claimed the 2020 election was stolen. Shortly after, DeMaio and other GOP lawmakers introduced unsuccessful bills to tighten voter restrictions before he pivoted to orchestrating a citizen-led ballot initiative last year.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Recently Trump has promoted the idea that large numbers of undocumented people are voting, for which there isn’t any evidence,” Pitney said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure>\u003cimg decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://calmatters.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/030326_Voter-ID-Presser_FG_CM_08-1024x682.jpg\" alt=\"A lawmaker, wearing a black suit with a striped yellow tie, stands behind a lectern while surrounded by people holding blue and yellow signs that say "REQUIRE VOTER ID."\" />\u003cfigcaption>Assemblymember Carl DeMaio announces that supporters of the CA Voter ID Initiative will submit more than 1.3 million signatures to qualify the measure for the November 2026 ballot during a press conference at the west steps of the state Capitol in Sacramento on March 3, 2026. Photo by Fred Greaves for CalMatters\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>Democrats bankrolling the opposition to Prop. 39 are also a who’s who of California politics.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The state Democratic Party is by far the largest contributor at nearly $5.5 million, followed by the Sonoma-area Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria with $2 million.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Longtime Democratic donors Patty Quillin, a film producer and wife of Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, and Quinn Delaney, a real estate investor and philanthropist, have each pitched in $1.5 million. Labor heavyweights such as the Service Employees International Union have contributed $1 million.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Democratic gubernatorial candidate \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/tag/xavier-becerra/\">Xavier Becerra\u003c/a> and Democratic Assembly Speaker \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/legislators/robert-rivas-165041\">Robert Rivas\u003c/a> have created a joint committee to raise money for the No campaign and U.S. Sen Alex Padilla is stumping at events.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Nearly 90% of Californians now vote by mail, according to the \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/historical-absentee\">secretary of state’s office\u003c/a>. That means the vast majority of voters would be required to write their Social Security or driver’s license number on their ballot should the initiative pass.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Many people aren’t going to be comfortable with that, No on 39 campaign spokesperson Tenoch Flores said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“This is about creating new avenues to reject valid mail ballots,” Flores said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“Yes on 39” spokesperson Meredith Shields told CalMatters that no one from the campaign could be made available for an interview. DeMaio declined an interview with CalMatters for this story. Uihlein did not respond to phone calls and emails requesting comment.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>The biggest donor\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Megadonor Uihlein and his wife, founders of the Wisconsin-based packaging company Uline, have poured millions into the Restoration of America PAC, a super PAC that frequently bankrolls Republican candidates in Illinois and Wisconsin. The Uihleins have \u003ca href=\"https://www.fec.gov/data/individual-contributions/?committee_id=C00571588&contributor_name=uihlein&two_year_transaction_period=2026\">donated $35 million to the PAC\u003c/a> this year alone, and Prop. 39 is the latest target in their effort to fund agenda-setting conservative causes.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Shanahan, an attorney and the former wife of Google executive Sergey Brin, has funneled $370,000 into the Yes campaign, while the Winklevoss brothers have each contributed $250,000.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The interest from the ultra-wealthy in Prop. 39 is a sign that the GOP could be looking to replicate a similar playbook in toss-up states, Sonoma State University political science Professor David McCuan said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>Republican proponents want to see how well or poorly voter ID does in Democratic-heavy California. If it does better than expected, that might mean a similar ballot measure could be fairly popular in more moderate battleground states, such as Michigan,Wisconsin or Pennsylvania.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“There is a spillover effect if you do better than expected, even if you lose,” McCuan said.\u003c/p>\n\u003ch2>Election security becomes about Trump\u003c/h2>\n\u003cp>Several Republican states moved to expand voter restrictions after the 2020 election, including Wyoming, Kentucky and Oklahoma. And while voter sentiment toward Trump is at historic lows, the GOP was surprisingly successful at getting the voter ID measure on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>The “Yes on 39” TV campaign has \u003ca href=\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts64oxA4neQ\" data-type=\"link\" data-=\"\">begun airing ads\u003c/a> distancing the measure’s supporters from Trump, while the No campaign released an \u003ca href=\"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjk5YyP7FYM\">ad airing in the Bay Area\u003c/a> featuring images of Trump and characterizations of Prop. 39 as a “power grab.”\u003c/p>\n\u003cfigure id=\"attachment_12101931\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\" style=\"max-width: 2000px\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-12101931\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/Prop39-voterID-scaled-e1791403746790.jpg\" alt=\"People in suits present at a podium surrounded by signs that read "Require Voter ID."\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Sen. Tony Strickland speaks at the Riverside County Registrar of Voters on Monday, March 2, 2026, for a press conference highlighting voter signatures in favor of placing a voter ID measure on the November ballot. \u003ccite>(Anjali Sharif-Paul/MediaNews Group/The Sun via Getty Images)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003cp>It’ll likely still be a tough road ahead for the Yes campaign. The default position for most voters is “no” on ballot propositions, meaning supporters of the measure will have to persuade enough voters to agree with them.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>An April poll by the \u003ca href=\"https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2d964377\">UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies\u003c/a> showed Californians broadly support requiring voters to present identification at the polls, but it found that support dipped below 50% when respondents were given specific details about the measure, such as that it’s meant to combat alleged voter fraud. A \u003ca href=\"https://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-september-2026/\">Public Policy Institute of California\u003c/a> poll in September found support for Prop. 39 has dropped to 43%.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>While this could be effective at turning out liberal voters, it’s unclear how even a hot-button issue will be enough to get Republicans out in a midterm election cycle with an unpopular president.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>“It’s hard to pass a red-coded measure in a blue wave election,” Pitney said.\u003c/p>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This article was \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/10/california-election-voter-id-proposition-39/\">originally published on CalMatters\u003c/a> and was republished under the \u003ca href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/\">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives\u003c/a> license.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12103398/why-are-out-of-state-billionaires-funding-a-california-voter-id-measure",
"authors": [
"byline_news_12103398"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_34061",
"news_18538",
"news_36336",
"news_17968",
"news_36673"
],
"featImg": "news_12103408",
"label": "source_news_12103398"
},
"news_12103195": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12103195",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12103195",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791378000000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "katie-porter-backs-sen-scott-wiener-in-san-francisco-congressional-race",
"title": "Katie Porter Backs Sen. Scott Wiener in San Francisco Congressional Race",
"publishDate": 1791378000,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Katie Porter Backs Sen. Scott Wiener in San Francisco Congressional Race | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\n\u003cp>Katie Porter is no longer in the running for \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082619/gubernatorial-candidate-katie-porter-fields-questions-on-housing-gas-prices-ai-agenda-at-kqed-town-hall\">California governor\u003c/a>, but the former Southern California congresswoman is staying active in politics by backing state Sen. Scott Wiener in his bid to represent San Francisco in Washington. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The latest endorsement comes a month out from Election Day in the race between Wiener and San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan, who are vying to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives. The former speaker of the House is \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12062796/nancy-pelosi-leaves-congress-after-38-years-defining-generations-of-democratic-power\">retiring\u003c/a> after nearly four decades in San Francisco’s congressional seat. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Right now, Donald Trump and his allies in Congress are ripping away healthcare and raising costs on working people. We need representatives in Washington who won’t back down and who know how to win,” said Porter, who represented Orange County in Congress from 2019 to 2025. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Scott will be a fighter for San Francisco families in Congress — on housing, on healthcare and on the cost of living — and I’m proud to endorse him.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12085954\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Sen. Scott Wiener speaks during an election night event at his campaign headquarters in San Francisco on June 2, 2026. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>The race between Chan and Wiener, both Democrats, could be close, with Wiener showing an 11-point lead, according to a September poll from Tavern Research, with a margin of error of 5.2%. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chan has surged in popularity since early this year, when polls showed her trailing Wiener and former candidate Saikat Chakrabarti, who lost in the June primary. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>She got a big boost in May from Pelosi, who has endorsed Chan as her successor, and has also nabbed endorsements from many labor unions and politicians like former Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Jackie Speier.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wiener has outraised his opponent, but Chan has found an audience in part by highlighting her own background, underscoring her experience as an immigrant and working mom. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>She has also blasted Wiener for his ties to the tech industry. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In a \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12102416/san-francisco-congressional-hopefuls-debate-ai-billionaires-and-of-course-housing\">recent debate\u003c/a> hosted by KQED and the San Francisco Chronicle, Chan repeatedly asked audiences, “Can we trust politicians who are bankrolled by the AI industry? The answer is no, we cannot.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>At the same event, Wiener emphasized housing projects that Chan has blocked, saying the supervisor has stymied opportunities to build more homes at a time when the city is facing an affordability crisis and housing shortage.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Porter, a consumer protection attorney and law professor, specifically pointed to Wiener’s legislative record on housing, healthcare and transit as her reasons for backing him. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wiener “has written the laws that are getting homes built in San Francisco and California, and he has taken on the powerful interests that drive up what families pay for healthcare, and protected public transit that families depend on to get to school and work,” she said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wiener said he was honored to have Porter’s endorsement. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We share a simple belief: San Francisco should be a place where working families can afford to live and raise their kids,” Wiener said in a statement. “That means building far more homes so rents and mortgages come down, protecting and expanding healthcare people can afford and investing in public transit.”\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Katie Porter is no longer in the running for \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082619/gubernatorial-candidate-katie-porter-fields-questions-on-housing-gas-prices-ai-agenda-at-kqed-town-hall\">California governor\u003c/a>, but the former Southern California congresswoman is staying active in politics by backing state Sen. Scott Wiener in his bid to represent San Francisco in Washington. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Katie Porter is no longer in the running for \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082619/gubernatorial-candidate-katie-porter-fields-questions-on-housing-gas-prices-ai-agenda-at-kqed-town-hall\">California governor\u003c/a>, but the former Southern California congresswoman is staying active in politics by backing state Sen. Scott Wiener in his bid to represent San Francisco in Washington. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The latest endorsement comes a month out from Election Day in the race between Wiener and San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan, who are vying to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives. The former speaker of the House is \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12062796/nancy-pelosi-leaves-congress-after-38-years-defining-generations-of-democratic-power\">retiring\u003c/a> after nearly four decades in San Francisco’s congressional seat. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The latest endorsement comes a month out from Election Day in the race between Wiener and San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan, who are vying to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives. The former speaker of the House is \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12062796/nancy-pelosi-leaves-congress-after-38-years-defining-generations-of-democratic-power\">retiring\u003c/a> after nearly four decades in San Francisco’s congressional seat. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Right now, Donald Trump and his allies in Congress are ripping away healthcare and raising costs on working people. We need representatives in Washington who won’t back down and who know how to win,” said Porter, who represented Orange County in Congress from 2019 to 2025. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Right now, Donald Trump and his allies in Congress are ripping away healthcare and raising costs on working people. We need representatives in Washington who won’t back down and who know how to win,” said Porter, who represented Orange County in Congress from 2019 to 2025. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Scott will be a fighter for San Francisco families in Congress — on housing, on healthcare and on the cost of living — and I’m proud to endorse him.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Scott will be a fighter for San Francisco families in Congress — on housing, on healthcare and on the cost of living — and I’m proud to endorse him.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12085954,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"align": "center",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12085954\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Sen. Scott Wiener speaks during an election night event at his campaign headquarters in San Francisco on June 2, 2026.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12085954\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Sen. Scott Wiener speaks during an election night event at his campaign headquarters in San Francisco on June 2, 2026.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The race between Chan and Wiener, both Democrats, could be close, with Wiener showing an 11-point lead, according to a September poll from Tavern Research, with a margin of error of 5.2%. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The race between Chan and Wiener, both Democrats, could be close, with Wiener showing an 11-point lead, according to a September poll from Tavern Research, with a margin of error of 5.2%. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Chan has surged in popularity since early this year, when polls showed her trailing Wiener and former candidate Saikat Chakrabarti, who lost in the June primary. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Chan has surged in popularity since early this year, when polls showed her trailing Wiener and former candidate Saikat Chakrabarti, who lost in the June primary. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>She got a big boost in May from Pelosi, who has endorsed Chan as her successor, and has also nabbed endorsements from many labor unions and politicians like former Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Jackie Speier.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>She got a big boost in May from Pelosi, who has endorsed Chan as her successor, and has also nabbed endorsements from many labor unions and politicians like former Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Jackie Speier.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed-v2/related-articles",
"attrs": {
"label": "2026 California Voter Guide",
"heroImage": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/80/2026/09/Aside-California-Voter-Guide-2026-Midterm-Election-1200x1200@2x.png",
"heroImageLink": "https://www.kqed.org/voterguide",
"manualLinks": [
{
"url": "https://www.kqed.org/voterguide",
"title": "Learn everything you need to cast an informed ballot for the 2026 election"
}
],
"query": "",
"postIds": [],
"labelWasCleared": false,
"maxPosts": 3,
"showImages": true,
"heroImageAlt": "",
"labelLink": "",
"alignment": "right",
"target": "_self",
"posts": []
},
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Wiener has outraised his opponent, but Chan has found an audience in part by highlighting her own background, underscoring her experience as an immigrant and working mom. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Wiener has outraised his opponent, but Chan has found an audience in part by highlighting her own background, underscoring her experience as an immigrant and working mom. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>She has also blasted Wiener for his ties to the tech industry. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>She has also blasted Wiener for his ties to the tech industry. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In a \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12102416/san-francisco-congressional-hopefuls-debate-ai-billionaires-and-of-course-housing\">recent debate\u003c/a> hosted by KQED and the San Francisco Chronicle, Chan repeatedly asked audiences, “Can we trust politicians who are bankrolled by the AI industry? The answer is no, we cannot.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In a \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12102416/san-francisco-congressional-hopefuls-debate-ai-billionaires-and-of-course-housing\">recent debate\u003c/a> hosted by KQED and the San Francisco Chronicle, Chan repeatedly asked audiences, “Can we trust politicians who are bankrolled by the AI industry? The answer is no, we cannot.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>At the same event, Wiener emphasized housing projects that Chan has blocked, saying the supervisor has stymied opportunities to build more homes at a time when the city is facing an affordability crisis and housing shortage.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>At the same event, Wiener emphasized housing projects that Chan has blocked, saying the supervisor has stymied opportunities to build more homes at a time when the city is facing an affordability crisis and housing shortage.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Porter, a consumer protection attorney and law professor, specifically pointed to Wiener’s legislative record on housing, healthcare and transit as her reasons for backing him. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Porter, a consumer protection attorney and law professor, specifically pointed to Wiener’s legislative record on housing, healthcare and transit as her reasons for backing him. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Wiener “has written the laws that are getting homes built in San Francisco and California, and he has taken on the powerful interests that drive up what families pay for healthcare, and protected public transit that families depend on to get to school and work,” she said. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Wiener “has written the laws that are getting homes built in San Francisco and California, and he has taken on the powerful interests that drive up what families pay for healthcare, and protected public transit that families depend on to get to school and work,” she said. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Wiener said he was honored to have Porter’s endorsement. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Wiener said he was honored to have Porter’s endorsement. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“We share a simple belief: San Francisco should be a place where working families can afford to live and raise their kids,” Wiener said in a statement. “That means building far more homes so rents and mortgages come down, protecting and expanding healthcare people can afford and investing in public transit.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“We share a simple belief: San Francisco should be a place where working families can afford to live and raise their kids,” Wiener said in a statement. “That means building far more homes so rents and mortgages come down, protecting and expanding healthcare people can afford and investing in public transit.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "The former gubernatorial candidate is throwing her support behind the state senator as polls suggest a close race between Scott Wiener and Connie Chan for Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s seat.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791328432,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 15,
"wordCount": 530
},
"headData": {
"title": "Katie Porter Backs Sen. Scott Wiener in San Francisco Congressional Race | KQED",
"description": "The former gubernatorial candidate is throwing her support behind the state senator as polls suggest a close race between Scott Wiener and Connie Chan for Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s seat.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Katie Porter Backs Sen. Scott Wiener in San Francisco Congressional Race",
"datePublished": "2026-10-07T06:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-06T16:13:52-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 13,
"slug": "politics",
"name": "Politics"
},
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12103195/katie-porter-backs-sen-scott-wiener-in-san-francisco-congressional-race",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003cp>Katie Porter is no longer in the running for \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082619/gubernatorial-candidate-katie-porter-fields-questions-on-housing-gas-prices-ai-agenda-at-kqed-town-hall\">California governor\u003c/a>, but the former Southern California congresswoman is staying active in politics by backing state Sen. Scott Wiener in his bid to represent San Francisco in Washington. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The latest endorsement comes a month out from Election Day in the race between Wiener and San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan, who are vying to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives. The former speaker of the House is \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12062796/nancy-pelosi-leaves-congress-after-38-years-defining-generations-of-democratic-power\">retiring\u003c/a> after nearly four decades in San Francisco’s congressional seat. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Right now, Donald Trump and his allies in Congress are ripping away healthcare and raising costs on working people. We need representatives in Washington who won’t back down and who know how to win,” said Porter, who represented Orange County in Congress from 2019 to 2025. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Scott will be a fighter for San Francisco families in Congress — on housing, on healthcare and on the cost of living — and I’m proud to endorse him.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12085954\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/260602-DISTRICT11SCOTTWIENER-15-BL-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Sen. Scott Wiener speaks during an election night event at his campaign headquarters in San Francisco on June 2, 2026. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>The race between Chan and Wiener, both Democrats, could be close, with Wiener showing an 11-point lead, according to a September poll from Tavern Research, with a margin of error of 5.2%. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chan has surged in popularity since early this year, when polls showed her trailing Wiener and former candidate Saikat Chakrabarti, who lost in the June primary. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>She got a big boost in May from Pelosi, who has endorsed Chan as her successor, and has also nabbed endorsements from many labor unions and politicians like former Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Jackie Speier.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wiener has outraised his opponent, but Chan has found an audience in part by highlighting her own background, underscoring her experience as an immigrant and working mom. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>She has also blasted Wiener for his ties to the tech industry. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In a \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12102416/san-francisco-congressional-hopefuls-debate-ai-billionaires-and-of-course-housing\">recent debate\u003c/a> hosted by KQED and the San Francisco Chronicle, Chan repeatedly asked audiences, “Can we trust politicians who are bankrolled by the AI industry? The answer is no, we cannot.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>At the same event, Wiener emphasized housing projects that Chan has blocked, saying the supervisor has stymied opportunities to build more homes at a time when the city is facing an affordability crisis and housing shortage.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Porter, a consumer protection attorney and law professor, specifically pointed to Wiener’s legislative record on housing, healthcare and transit as her reasons for backing him. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wiener “has written the laws that are getting homes built in San Francisco and California, and he has taken on the powerful interests that drive up what families pay for healthcare, and protected public transit that families depend on to get to school and work,” she said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wiener said he was honored to have Porter’s endorsement. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We share a simple belief: San Francisco should be a place where working families can afford to live and raise their kids,” Wiener said in a statement. “That means building far more homes so rents and mortgages come down, protecting and expanding healthcare people can afford and investing in public transit.”\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12103195/katie-porter-backs-sen-scott-wiener-in-san-francisco-congressional-race",
"authors": [
"11840"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_18538",
"news_20149",
"news_36336",
"news_27626",
"news_34377",
"news_24206",
"news_177",
"news_17968",
"news_38",
"news_1217"
],
"featImg": "news_12074712",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12103278": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12103278",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12103278",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791367200000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "the-shadow",
"title": "The Shadow",
"publishDate": 1791367200,
"format": "audio",
"headTitle": "The Shadow | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"term": 37408,
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"#Transcript\">View Full Episode Transcript\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In 2016,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Nancy Pelosi was planning on retiring from Congress. But Donald Trump’s presidential victory disrupted her plans, and her legacy. Pelosi’s public battles with the President cemented her status as a liberal warrior – spearheading two impeachments and navigating the January 6th attack. But to some in her caucus, including the young progressives of “The Squad,” Pelosi’s approach wasn’t enough to address a new wave of populism and a growing mistrust of government. And amidst this politically fraught landscape, did Pelosi’s actions around stock trading — or inaction, according to some — add fuel to the fire?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"Transcript\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This is a computer-generated transcript. While our team has reviewed it, there may be errors.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Last episode, we focused on the Affordable Care Act, which then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi pushed through Congress. But when you ask people about Pelosi, like our producer Ariella Markowitz did on the streets in DC, something else tends to come up. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ariella Markowitz: \u003c/strong>What comes to mind when you think of Nancy Pelosi?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Vox 1: \u003c/strong>Man, California, stocks, stock trades, that’s funny. Insider stock trading. He defends that, he’s gotten quite wealthy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Vox 2:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>She has manipulated her position and used it to her benefit.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>It’s something her opponents bring up a lot. Here’s President Trump earlier this year during his State of the Union address. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>Let’s also ensure that members of Congress cannot corruptly profit from using insider information. They stood up for that, I can’t believe it. Did Nancy Pelosi stand up if she’s here? Doubt it. Pass the Stop Insider Trading Act without delay. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A few months later, the House passed a stock trading ban for members of Congress, and Nancy Pelosi voted against it. Some Democrats had an issue with the bill because it included an unrelated voter ID provision, which many critics say is really a way of suppressing Democratic turnout in elections. And the stock trading bill? It wouldn’t have applied if it were the president. Profiteering by President Trump and his family, including prolific stock trading, are a trademark of his second term. But to many, the name Pelosi triggers allegations of corruption. In her second run as Speaker, Pelosi and President Trump became full-on enemies, locked in public brawls that would define both of their legacies. But Pelosi doesn’t really want to go there.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I don’t spend a whole lot of time talking about Trump, so…\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I know he’s not your favorite.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, it’s not my favorite compared to almost any creature crawling the earth. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Still, this creature has defined her final chapter in unexpected ways. From KQED, this is The Speaker. I’m Scott Shafer. Today, how Pelosi responds to what she and many see as a fundamental threat to democracy. President Trump. And with faith in the Democratic Party and public trust in U.S. Institutions at their lowest in decades, the shadow that hangs over her legacy. Accusations of insider stock trading in Congress. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi says she planned on retiring after the 2016 election. She would have been 76 years old, and she was assuming that a Democrat would win. You were really ready to say, that’s it, I’m done.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Well, I was ready to say it a number of times, but I only thought I would go 10 years. I never thought I’d run for Congress, much less for leadership. And then the members, you have to stay, you have stay, you to stay. And so I did.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She thought her crowning achievement, the Affordable Care Act, her baby, would be protected under a President Hillary Clinton. On November 8, 2016, Pelosi was in Washington with her colleagues, waiting for the returns to come in.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>One of my colleagues was the chairman of the party in Philadelphia. And we were getting returns from him saying, they told us if we got over 500,000 in Philadelphia, we would carry Pennsylvania. So one night he’d say, it’s getting closer, but we’re okay, it was getting closer. Then finally he said, you know, the turnout from McCall, but you know just naming the names of some counties is just unprecedented. We’re not gonna be able to offset it. I was like getting kicked in the back by a mule.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>During his first campaign for president, Trump had leaned into people’s cynicism and mistrust of politicians.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>If we win on November 8th, we are going to drain the swamp in Washington, D.C. We’re draining the swamp.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>After he won, President Trump issued a flurry of executive orders and policies. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>President Trump’s most recent executive order effectively banned citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. For at least 90 days. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>Today President Donald Trump is continuing to defend his administration’s policy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>When you prosecute the parents for coming in illegally, which should happen, you have to take the children away. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>And, in 2017, when white supremacists rallied in Charlottesville, Virginia? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>There are people, bodies laying on the ground right now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>NAZIS GO HOME! \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In response to the violence, Trump said this.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>Very fine people on both sides \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the midst of all this, Pelosi and Democrats campaigned hard to defeat Republicans in the 2018 midterms. But economic unrest was starting to influence the Democratic Party’s politics. For years there had been discontent on the left about the 2008 bailout and economic disparity. A movement called Occupy Wall Street kicked off in 2011. The slogan was, we are the 99 percent. In 2016, Senator Bernie Sanders had been a grassroots presidential candidate, and he was popular. More than 40 percent of people who voted in the primaries wanted him to be the nominee.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bernie Sanders: \u003c/strong>The reason that we have done so well, the reason I believe we’re going to do so well in the Hampshire and in the other states that follow, the reason is the American people are saying no to a rigged economy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Sanders had run on a message about economic inequality.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bernie Sanders: \u003c/strong>They no longer want to see an economy in which the average American works longer hours for low wages while almost all new income and wealth is going to the top 1%.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Some people argue that this energy helped Democrats take back the House in 2018, two years into Trump’s presidency. They’d been out of power since the Tea Party had stormed into Congress almost a decade earlier. That election night, Pelosi took the stage again to the chants of \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Thank you all, thank you all very much, remember this feeling, know the power to win. Today is more than about Democrats and Republicans, it’s about restoring the Constitution’s checks and balances to the Trump administration.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>And with that election, a wave of newcomers with bold ideas, including four progressive women who became known as the Squad. Ayanna Pressley from Massachusetts, Rashida Tlaib from Michigan, Ilhan Omar from Minnesota, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, AOC, from New York. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>I think what we’ve seen is that working-class Americans want a clear champion and there is nothing radical about moral clarity in 2018.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>AOC is a democratic socialist, like Bernie Sanders. She defeated Joe Crowley, one of Pelosi’s top deputies in leadership. Many had actually seen Crowley as the person best positioned to become speaker after Pelosi left. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>He didn’t pay enough attention to his district. That, you know, that’s really what it is. It was an election in the summer. So I had very low turnout. I mean, he was predicating his success on how things go in a full election. But AOC ran a great campaign and it was stunning because he’s terrific and respected and he was chair of the caucus, I think, at the time. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Needless to say, there was some friction between the new members and the old guard. Before being sworn in, AOC joined a climate protest outside Pelosi’s office. People are holding yellow signs that say Green Jobs for All.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>I just want to let you all know how proud I am of each and every single one of you for putting yourselves and your bodies and everything on the line to make sure that we save our planet, our generation, and our home.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi told me she was the wrong target for their protest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>They should not have been in my office as a start because we had done more on climate than anybody.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Once they won back the House, some new, younger members were among those questioning whether Pelosi was the right leader for the House Democrats. But after cutting some deals, Pelosi was easily elected speaker for a second time. The squad cast their votes for her, too. Her swearing in was joyous.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I’d like to call my grandchildren up to be here when I take you, and any other children who want to join them. Come on, kids. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She’d have her work cut out for her. In June of 2019, the House was considering an appropriations bill that would provide funds to process and detain migrants at the border, but also for an emergency food and shelter program, money to help deal with what people were calling a humanitarian crisis. This bill was being debated a year after the Trump administration rolled out and then backed down on a policy that criminally prosecuted all adults crossing the border without papers. The Zero Tolerance Policy meant children were separated from their parents. It was something AOC spoke about at an oversight committee hearing in July 2019. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>And what was worse about this, Mr. Chairman, was the fact that there were American flags hanging all over these facilities, that children being separated from their parents in front of an American flag.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Progressives didn’t want to give more money to the agencies that carried out Trump’s harsh border policies. Pelosi and other Democratic leaders negotiated with them, added additional health and safety standards for migrant children to the bill, but the squad still defected. They were the only Democrats to vote no on the House bill. You described the squad as just four votes. It was. That’s what it was. It was four votes This may sound harsh, but it’s how Pelosi sees things. They were a small obstacle that didn’t affect her vote count. But Pelosi would be challenged again by the progressive wing when she had to give up the House bill with stronger protections for a Senate version. She was disappointed that Senate Democrats hadn’t fought for a better bill, but she decided to compromise and push it through. That caused public outrage from House progressives. AOC took her issues with Pelosi public. She said in an interview with the Washington Post… That she felt the squad had been singled out by Pelosi, implied it was because they were four women of color. AOC’s chief of staff compared centrist Democrats to segregationists on Twitter. He asked why this so-called legislative mastermind, referring to Pelosi, couldn’t get more done on kitchen table issues. By some accounts, Pelosi was furious. Even today, you can hear the annoyance in her voice.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>If you want to legislate, don’t be on airwaves criticizing the people whose votes you need. You can be here as a legislator where you need the votes of people for an issue that you may want to advance, or you can be an internet where you’re here to criticize your colleagues and expect them to vote for your bill.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In one closed-door meeting with her Democratic caucus, she told them to bring their grievances to her, not tweet about them to the public. She said at the end of the day, her goal was to help the children. She told them, some of you are here to make a beautiful pate, but we’re making sausage most of the time. Our producer Ariella asked Representative Ilhan Omar, part of the squad, about this.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ariella Markowitz: \u003c/strong>She was giving speeches about sausages versus pates and all of this. What do you think about that got under her skin? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ilhan Omar: \u003c/strong>I think she herself saw herself as a progressive and in some ways might’ve felt insulted that the progressive movement didn’t think of her as being one of them. And she felt like because she was the speaker and she’s the leader for the whole caucus and the whole House, that the decisions that she had to make had to be for the good of the whole.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now as I thought about these showdowns between the squad and the speaker, I remember how Pelosi herself had sort of ignored Congressional norms when she got to Washington. So I asked her how she felt about AOC. I wonder if you saw a little bit of yourself in her.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t at all.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I don’t know. Well, wait until you hear the question. Well, you just asked it, and I said no. I mean, whatBrase I’m thinking of is when you first got there in your very first speech, you talked about AIDS. You were kind of breaking the protocol a little bit. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>She’s operational, make no mistake, some of those squads are not. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Say what you mean by that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Operational is that she knows that she wants to accomplish something. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Operational. This is one of Pelosi’s favorite words. It’s what Congresswoman Sala Burton said about Pelosi before she endorsed her back in 1987. So when Pelosi called AOC operational, this was a mark of respect. She’s learned how to get things done. Here’s the thing, Pelosi comes from progressive San Francisco. She thinks of herself as a liberal, cares about things like ending poverty, providing health care, and believes the government should be a force for good. But she values something else, too, maybe even more than anything else, being effective. It means working within a system she ultimately believes in to get things done, being willing to compromise in the process. But in this era of President Trump… Was being operational enough? Even though she loathed President Trump, Pelosi tried to enter their first meeting with an open mind. Out of respect for the institution.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>This is historic. It’s a meeting between the new president and the leadership of the Congress, bipartisan leadership in the Congress. I’ve been in that meeting many times with President Bush, Obama. It’s historic. And so I’m sitting there thinking, why don’t we begin? Will he quote the Bible? Will he talk about America and founders and what America means to us? And we talk about his family and what this… Means to him, how will he begin this meeting? He leans over on the desk like this, the table, and says, you know, I won the popular vote. It was totally offensive. So I thought, well, that’s not true. That’s not truth. And he said, well I’m not even counting California.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The relationship went downhill from there. You may remember some of those moments, like in 2018 when Pelosi walked out of a meeting with Trump in a red coat and Armani sunglasses looking completely relaxed. She put her sunglasses on right in time for the photos. The image went viral.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>The new power suit for women, red coats, sunglasses, nerves of steel. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I had no idea, I just put on my coat and walked out to the press, which is outside. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Or you may remember her dressed in all white, standing behind the president. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>But Nancy Pelosi became the queen of condescending applause. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Clapping sarcastically at Trump during his 2019 State of the Union address. She clearly wasn’t intimidated by him. After all, this is the same woman who called Bush incompetent on national TV and refused to apologize for it. To me, it seems like Pelosi was adapting to the moment. She was smart enough to sense that in this era of politics, it’s those viral images that stick with people, not the closed-door legislative rooms Pelosi was used cutting deals in. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>The fact is, people want to see moments. You know, I hear speeches, they want to see moments, what people are happy about is that I did that, that I pointed to him, that I walked out of the office, because it spoke to their, how they felt or believed at the time. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She was getting under his skin. To those in the Trump 1.0 administration, Pelosi was an obstructionist. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mick Mulvaney: \u003c/strong>Nancy was just so difficult to work with. Again, she may take that as a badge of honor, and I get it, there’s a lot of Republicans who take their unwillingness to compromise with Democrats as a badge of honor. So she’s not unique in that, but she had zero interest in doing anything with Donald Trump.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s Mick Mulvaney, who was President Trump’s chief of staff when Pelosi regained the speakership. We talked to him last episode, a Tea Party guy who campaigned for his House seat against the Affordable Care Act and won. He said President Trump respected Pelosi at first.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mick Mulvaney: \u003c/strong>He respects strength and that’s certainly what she has. When she was doing what she was doing, she had a margin roughly the same size that Mike Johnson has today in the House. And she was able to corral her party and he respected that. But at the end of the day, she had zero interest in being with the guy and I think the country is worse for it. If they had wanted to sit down and cut some deals, they could have had a tremendous bipartisan deal on infrastructure. I even think they could’ve had a tremendous bipartisan on immigration. But it was fight, fight, fighting the whole time. And it was bitter and poisonous.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>While Republicans felt Pelosi was just an obstacle to getting anything done, many Democrats were calling for Trump’s impeachment. But Pelosi was wary.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>People wanted to impeach him just because he was obnoxious and dyed his hair orange. Everybody had a thing of he’s not really presidential. That’s not a cause for impeachment. You know what I’m saying?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But then, in the summer of 2019, President Trump gave Democrats their opportunity.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I’ve said the only person who’s responsible for the impeachment of Donald Trump, not once but twice, is Donald Trump. He gave us no choice.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A whistleblower said that in a phone call, Trump tried to get Ukrainian President Zelensky to investigate Trump’s rival in the upcoming election, Joe Biden, and his son Hunter. The White House released a transcript of the call, and President Trump tried to deflect to the debunked claim that Joe Biden was linked to a corruption scandal. And let me tell you something, Biden’s son is corrupt, and Biden is corrupt. To Pelosi, this attempt to interfere with the 2020 election was the unconstitutional violation Democrats could not ignore. This would be the grounds for the impeachment case.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>What he did was wrong. Now, different other things you could have included in that we said, you have to keep it simple. What is the thing that crosses the line, not just on its own might be grounds for impeachment, but not on the caliber of the Zelensky letter. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But Pelosi didn’t revel in the impeachment, she actually silenced the applause after the impeachment vote with a stern glance and a hand gesture.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Article 1 is adopted. The question is on adoption of Article 2.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>You can count votes. You were probably, I’m guessing, pretty confident the Senate would not convict, right? They needed 67 votes. Why did you think it was important to go ahead and really start a process that you knew ultimately you would not?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We did succeed. We impeached him twice. But you think that we should be guided by what the Senate might do? You think that, we would say, well, the president has committed impregnable offenses of highest magnitude, and we shouldn’t do that because we don’t know what some senators are going to do? No. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>I am thrilled to report to you tonight that our economy is the best it has ever been. Our military is completely rebuilt, with its power being unmatched anywhere in the world, and it’s not even close. It was February\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The day before the Senate voted to acquit Trump of both impeachment charges. President Trump was giving his State of the Union speech, and Pelosi went a step further than she’d ever gone before. She was sitting behind Trump, in her house. He’d chosen that night to honor right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh, who held notoriously homophobic views. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>And Rush, in recognition of all that you have done for our nation, the millions of people a day that you speak to and that you inspire, I am proud to announce tonight that you will be receiving our country’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi sat there, lips pursed, looking down at the printed speech, looking away from the balcony where Limbaugh was, and toward her caucus in the audience. As Trump finished his speech, saying the best was yet to come, she stood up, not clapping, but ripping up the president’s printed remarks two or three pages at a time, biting her lip. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I didn’t intend to do that. It just was a manifesto of lies. And I wasn’t just gonna let that stand. I just wasn’t gonna let it stand. As courteous as we are to a guest in our house, when he abuses that courtesy, when he lies there the whole time, gives a medal of freedom to an anti-gay, blah, blah, and our house. Do that at the White House. We don’t agree with your choice, but that’s your choice. You’re the president, but don’t come here and sully the House of Representatives chamber. With your obnoxious behavior. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>Pelosi, at her heart, believes in institutions. She respects the separation of powers, the three branches of government, and the staying power of those institutions. But to me, it seemed like at that moment something changed for her, not even standing with polite, respectful applause for the president as she did behind President George W. Bush for both of his State of the Union addresses when she was speaker, instead A stunning act of defiance on primetime television. Nine months later, Joe Biden won the presidential election. Trump was out. On January 6, 2021, Pelosi, along with Vice President Mike Pence, were overseeing the certification of the election. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We didn’t anticipate violence. We didn’t expect the President of the United States to incite an insurrection.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>We’re starting to get surrounded. They’re taking the north-west scaffolding. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Protesters attack the west side of the Capitol, where presidential inauguration ceremonies are held. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Security came to me and they said we’re taking you out I said I can handle this guy you know we’re ready \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>We are walking over now to the tunnel\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We could see on TV, because when you’re in the chamber, you can’t see. You see on tv what was happening, that they were coming to the Capitol. It’s really hard to explain. This is the citadel of democracy to the world. And these people are coming in, breaking windows, and they go in, and we’re seeing them go into the Capitol with Dixie flags, you know, Confederate flags, under the dome that Lincoln built when he was president. He built it during the Civil War. People said to him, use the steel for the war and the personnel for the War. He said. No, we have to show the world that we are resilient. So they continue with the dome. Under Lincoln’s dome, Confederate flags. One guy with a shirt, six million Jews were not enough. Auschwitz. That’s. What this was, assaulting police, all the rest of that, defecating on the floor. I say this because this brute who was president now wants to give them money for killing or endangering the lives of police officers. They were gonna get a bullet in my effing brain. They use the F word a lot about me throughout the whole thing. They were going to hang the vice president. Gallows for him.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>No doubt, many in the mob hated Pelosi. They came looking for her. They broke into her speaker’s office. A man put his feet up on her desk. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>Where are you Nancy? We’re looking for you! She’s in jail!\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Have you ever, you know, given yourself the permission to think about what would have happened if they had found you?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Well, here’s the thing that I thought. I wasn’t really thinking so much about my personal safety. I was thinking about my grandson who was with me. His mother, Alexandra, took the boys to see an historic event, the transfer of power.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But something fundamental had broken.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>And this vile creature, the vilest creature to ever crawl the face of the earth. And they said, well, what about Hitler? I said, he wasn’t president of the United States. Insights are an insurrection, sits in his office, and then won’t let the police, the National Guard come and then lies about it the whole time. I called the governor of Virginia. They said they had their troops ready. These people are so idiotic, but let’s put that over all of them. The secretary of the army who had the jurisdiction to. So I have to talk to my boss. That’s the secretary of defense. Haven’t you done that yet? Well, this is hard. It’s complicated. It takes time. I said, they have been attacking the Capitol. Well, I have to go ask my boss and well, you have to have authority at the location. I said there, look, authority is there. You need to be able to send the national guard. But they may, they avoided everything about it because their boss. The Commander-in-Chief, who can say over any of that, was just holding them back. And even some of the Republicans were asking the President to call off those guys, and he still wouldn’t do it. This is, I want to tell you something, this is a demonic figure, this guy who is unfortunately in the White House.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I know you’re very religious. Did you pray?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Of course we prayed, prayed for our country. We prayed for those who were under assault.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A few hours after the attack, authorities confirmed the Capitol had been secured. Congress was going to continue certifying the election results\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I said, you know what, we’re going to the floor. That’s where this assault occurred, that’s where we’re going back to show the world.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the early hours of the morning on January 7th, 2021, the election was certified. In his final days in office, Nancy Pelosi would lead another impeachment against President Trump for inciting the insurrection. The FBI investigated the rioters. There were prosecutions. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>The Arkansas man who was photographed on January 6th with his feet up on Nancy Pelosi’s desk was sentenced yesterday. He got four and a half years in prison. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Biden became president. Working together in the midst of the COVID pandemic, he and Pelosi muscled some big bills through a divided Congress. The Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS and Science Act. But during her last years as speaker, Pelosi made headlines for another reason. In 2021, at a press conference, a reporter from Business Insider asked Pelosi a question.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Business Insider Reporter: \u003c/strong>Should members of Congress and their spouses be banned from trading individual stocks while serving in Congress? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I don’t know to this second one, we have a responsibility to report in the stock, on the stock but I’m not familiar with that five month review but if people aren’t reporting they should be. Because this is a free market and people, we have a free-market economy, they should be able to participate in that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi was firm in her response. No ban on stock trading. At that moment, she didn’t see the backlash, but it had been coming for years. Back in 2011, Pelosi had just gotten the Affordable Care Act across the finish line. She lost the speakership, but was still leader of House Democrats. Then, the CBS News magazine 60 Minutes published a bombshell investigation.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Peter Schweizer: \u003c/strong>There are all sorts of forms of honest grafts that congressmen engage in that allow them to become very, very wealthy. So it’s not illegal, but I think it’s highly unethical. I think it’s highly offensive and wrong.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s Peter Schweizer, the main source in the story. At the time, Schweizer was a fellow at the Hoover Institute, a conservative think tank. He’d been criticized as early as 1993 for fabricating sources and events in his book, Friendly Spies. He’d go on to publish Clinton Cash in 2015, a book that Media Matters concluded contained over 20 errors, fabrications, and distortions. On 60 Minutes, Schweiser claimed that members of Congress… Have been trading stocks based on inside information.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Peter Schweizer: \u003c/strong>We know that during the health care debate, people were trading health care stocks. We know during the financial crisis of 2008, they were getting out of the market before the rest of America really knew what was going on.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The 60 Minutes story didn’t exclusively focus on Pelosi. They called out other lawmakers, too, including Republican Speaker John Boehner. But the report looked at an incident from 2008. Pelosi’s husband, Paul, had bought shares of stock from Visa, the credit card company. The report called into question whether the family’s investment influenced Pelosi’s decision-making around regulations to protect credit card consumers. To investigate this, the 60 Minutes correspondent, Steve Croft, went to a press conference and asked Pelosi about it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft: \u003c/strong>Madam Leader, I wanted to ask you why you and your husband back in March of 2008 accepted and participated in a very large IPO deal from Visa, at a time there was major legislation affecting the credit card companies making its way through the house, and did you consider that to be a conflict of interest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I don’t know what your point is of your question. Is there some point that you want to make with that? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>This response is classic Pelosi, full-throated denial.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>It’s not true, and that’s that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I don’t understand what part’s not true.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Yes, sir, that I would act upon an investment\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>After the piece aired, Pelosi’s office put out a statement. It denied that her decisions about regulating credit card companies were swayed by her husband’s stock purchases. The statement said, quote, It is very troubling that 60 Minutes would base their reporting off of an already discredited conservative author who has made a career out of attacking Democrats. Peter Schweizer was a close ally of Steve Bannon, one of Trump’s top advisors. Schweizer would become editor of the far-right website Breitbart News. It’s true that Democrats had introduced a bill that would regulate credit card swipe fees in the House and that the bill died later that year. But Pelosi said it wasn’t because she was trying to help her husband’s portfolio. By the time the bill made it out of committee, Pelosi said, it was too late to bring the for a vote before the session ended. The Democratic congressman who introduced the bill, John Conyers from Michigan, said even if they’d somehow managed to pass it, President Bush would probably have vetoed it. So Pelosi said they waited until President Obama was in the White House to push card regulations through. In 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act included a cap on debit card swipe fees and other protections for credit card consumers. There are lots of moving parts here. It’s hard to say definitively what happened or why. But the accusations were very powerful. They touched a nerve. In 2012, public anger about the issue of stock trading in Congress was mounting. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft: \u003c/strong>Both the House and the\u003cem> \u003c/em>Senate in a rare display of bipartisanship overwhelmingly passed the Stock Act, which prohibits its members from trading on non-public information gathered during the course of their duties.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Congress passed the Stock Act, stopped trading on congressional knowledge. It’s been said sunlight is the best disinfectant, meaning transparency. The Stock Act required members of Congress to disclose their trades within 30 to 45 days of making them. But the issue didn’t go away. Actually, with the information available to the public, people became more aware of how much money Congress members were making on stock trading. There are even apps you can use to track and literally copy the same stock trades the Pelosi’s and other members of Congress do. When Pelosi came to Congress, she and her husband were already wealthy. Her husband is a finance guy. The family had at least $610,000 worth in stocks. In today’s money, that’s something like 1.8 million. The stock research platform, Quiver Quantitative, estimates that her family currently holds around $135 million in publicly traded assets. In 2021, Pelosi ranked in the top 25 richest people in Congress. Here’s Hillary Brossith, she’s executive director at OpenSecrets, a non-profit that tracks money and politics. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Hilary Braseth: \u003c/strong>We often find that some of the highest drivers of traffic to our site are citizens who are curious about the net worth of any given member of Congress. And Nancy Pelosi, I think in many ways, is one of the main profiles that we often see folks looking up, perhaps because she has quite high of a net worth.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now, owning stocks can benefit anyone, but the richer you are and the more stocks you own, the more you make when the market goes up. Having private briefings, like members of Congress do, can give them a leg up before the market reacts to news. Business Insider recently published an investigation that found that dozens of Congress members have violated federal conflict of interest laws. Pelosi wasn’t on that list, but many of her colleagues were accused of disclosing after the required disclosure window. And a few were accused of insider trading. It seems obvious that banning members of Congress from trading stocks wouldn’t just stop the practice from happening, but would also remove the appearance of a conflict, but Pelosi opposed it. When Pelosi first ran for her seat back in 1987, her opponents argued that Pelosi’s wealth would put her out of touch with working class people. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carol Ruth Silver: \u003c/strong>How can she relate to people like me, a single parent, working mother, or somebody else? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Fast forward to 2020. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, Pelosi went on the James Corden show.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>James Corden: \u003c/strong>Welcome back, we’re here with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and we’ve asked her to share something from her home for late, late show and tell. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the segment she showed her freezer full of ice cream.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Speaker Pelosi, what have you found? I don’t know what I would have done if ice cream were not invented.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>People were losing their jobs, terrified about the economy. Trump’s reelection campaign seized on an opportunity to punch back at Pelosi. They posted a video on YouTube called Let Them Eat Ice Cream, Nancy Antoinette, a reference to the infamous Queen of France. It featured the James Corden interview with some creative edits. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video: \u003c/strong>Speaker Pelosi, what are you gonna share with us from your home? Chocolate candy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video: \u003c/strong>Thousands have been forced to wait for hours at food banks all across the country. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video:\u003c/strong>Oh my chocolate and then we have some other chocolate \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>It was a partisan attack, but like her opposition to the congressional stock trading ban, the moment highlighted one of Pelosi’s weaknesses. She can be a little tone deaf to how her own behavior strikes others and how it stokes anger. When we started making this podcast, I knew I wanted to ask Pelosi about congressional stock trading, but I have to say I wasn’t looking forward to bringing it up. I know how she can sometimes go into attack mode when she’s asked about a topic she doesn’t like. She completely rejects accusations that she used knowledge gained as a member of Congress to make favorable stock transactions. She defended her stock trades to me as something everyone does.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>My point of view is if family has investments, stock, I’m not talking about big deal. Most people don’t even realize that their 401k is in the stock market. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But there are a lot of people who’ve come to Congress and left with a lot more money than they got there. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>If they’re doing something illegal, then they should be charged with that. They have investigated me personally, politically, economically, all the time. They have never come up with anything. They’ve spent a lot of money and a lot time. They can say I have cloven feet and horns in my head and I’m a devil and the rest of that, but they’ve never come with anything that I did anything wrong in Congress. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Josh Hawley was on Fox News saying that, you know, insider trading corruption should be prosecuted.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Not me. Nobody’s ever accused me… \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Well, he was referring to you. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In 2023, Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri introduced the Pelosi act preventing elected leaders from owning securities and investments. I tried asking Pelosi why she didn’t try and pass a ban when she was leader. So you don’t feel that not getting that passed is a negative part of your legacy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I don’t at all, because the people who, the members didn’t, it’s up to the members to get something passed like that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Yeah, although as leader, you have a lot of say in what the caucus wants to do. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t. All you need is a few people to say, we’re not doing this. And some of them were in the leadership. They just thought it was insulting to the members to say you don’t have any values and you don’t have any judgment. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But now she says she does support a ban on stock trading for members of Congress. So I kept pushing her. What changed? You oppose that for many years and I’m wondering.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t pose it for many years. I posed it when they suggested it, and then Kalkus said they won it and I supported it. It didn’t come forward because there weren’t the votes to bring it forward.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>At the top of the episode, I mentioned a stock trading ban passed Congress in July. But Pelosi didn’t vote for it, because she says it exempted the president.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>It was a terrible bill. And we wanted it to be more comprehensive, including the President of the United States, because they would never get that signed by the President of the United States. But if you look at that bill, it is totally incomplete. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now, Pelosi doesn’t like to back down, especially when she feels like these are partisan attacks. But she also knows that appearances matter, and they can undercut trust in elected officials. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We want to do whatever it takes, and that means even this issue, to restore the confidence people have in the system. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Hilary Braseth of Open Secrets again.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Hilary Braseth: \u003c/strong>Earlier this year, there was a survey that roughly 75% of the country thinks that there is too much money in politics and does not like it. And so this really presents a quandary that those who get elected into public office tend to benefit from the system as it’s designed and don’t have much incentive to change the system or to create tighter rules around how much money they can raise, whether or not they can trade stocks based on. Knowledge they might be privy to.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Senate Democrats ended up blocking the stock trading ban. They promised future reform, but needless to say, any ban passed now wouldn’t take effect until Pelosi leaves office. It’s been over five years since the violent riot at the Capitol. A lot has changed since then. Back in 2018, to round up votes to regain the gavel, Pelosi agreed to a four-year limit on her second speakership. And in 2023, after Democrats lost the House, she stepped down from leadership. President Trump is back in power after defeating former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024. Republicans also maintain control of the House. And after he came back into office, President Trump pardoned those who’d been successfully prosecuted for their role in the January 6th attacks. The formal office of the Speaker of the House is historic and spacious, with vaulted ceilings and ornate wooden furniture, outer sitting areas full of comfortable couches and arm chairs. From a window you can see out across the National Mall. But that’s no longer Pelosi’s domain. Her party’s in the minority now, and her current office? It’s nice enough, but decidedly un-grand. It’s relatively cramped, packed with memorabilia. Colorful gavels, gifts from her constituents, chocolate for people who come to visit her, and sitting on a table, a pair of pink boxing gloves with her initials, NP, bedazzled in rhinestones, a gift from her friend Barbara Boxer. They were a little joke, boxing gloves from a boxer, but I think they really fit. No matter the cost, she goes down swinging. She’s not the speaker anymore, but she’s still Pelosi, calling shots behind the scenes, doing her best to shape the future of a Democratic party that’s up for grabs.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>We’re seeing a lot of turmoil in the Democratic Party in terms of candidates. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I disagree with your terminology. A lot of turmoil in the Democratic Party. There isn’t a lot of turmoil.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s coming up next week on The Speaker. The Speaker is a production of KQED in San Francisco and distributed by NPR. It’s hosted and reported by me, Scott Shafer. It’s reported and produced by Ariella Markowitz. It’s edited by Padmini Raghunath. Final mix and sound designed by Christopher Beale. Fact checking by Mark Betancourt. Additional editing from Anna Sussman and Jen Chien, KQED’s director of podcasts. Original theme song composed by Cedric Wilson. Additional music from APM. Maha Sanad is KQED’s podcast engagement producer. Ethan Toven-Lindsey is KQED’s editor-in-chief. Special thanks to our partners from the Oral History Center at the University of California, Berkeley. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television, and radio artists, San Francisco, Northern California local.\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"#Transcript\">View Full Episode Transcript\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"#Transcript\">View Full Episode Transcript\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In 2016,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Nancy Pelosi was planning on retiring from Congress. But Donald Trump’s presidential victory disrupted her plans, and her legacy. Pelosi’s public battles with the President cemented her status as a liberal warrior – spearheading two impeachments and navigating the January 6th attack. But to some in her caucus, including the young progressives of “The Squad,” Pelosi’s approach wasn’t enough to address a new wave of populism and a growing mistrust of government. And amidst this politically fraught landscape, did Pelosi’s actions around stock trading — or inaction, according to some — add fuel to the fire?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In 2016,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Nancy Pelosi was planning on retiring from Congress. But Donald Trump’s presidential victory disrupted her plans, and her legacy. Pelosi’s public battles with the President cemented her status as a liberal warrior – spearheading two impeachments and navigating the January 6th attack. But to some in her caucus, including the young progressives of “The Squad,” Pelosi’s approach wasn’t enough to address a new wave of populism and a growing mistrust of government. And amidst this politically fraught landscape, did Pelosi’s actions around stock trading — or inaction, according to some — add fuel to the fire?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Episode Transcript",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"Transcript\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"Transcript\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This is a computer-generated transcript. While our team has reviewed it, there may be errors.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This is a computer-generated transcript. While our team has reviewed it, there may be errors.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Last episode, we focused on the Affordable Care Act, which then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi pushed through Congress. But when you ask people about Pelosi, like our producer Ariella Markowitz did on the streets in DC, something else tends to come up. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Last episode, we focused on the Affordable Care Act, which then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi pushed through Congress. But when you ask people about Pelosi, like our producer Ariella Markowitz did on the streets in DC, something else tends to come up. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ariella Markowitz: \u003c/strong>What comes to mind when you think of Nancy Pelosi?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ariella Markowitz: \u003c/strong>What comes to mind when you think of Nancy Pelosi?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Vox 1: \u003c/strong>Man, California, stocks, stock trades, that’s funny. Insider stock trading. He defends that, he’s gotten quite wealthy. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Vox 1: \u003c/strong>Man, California, stocks, stock trades, that’s funny. Insider stock trading. He defends that, he’s gotten quite wealthy. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Vox 2:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>She has manipulated her position and used it to her benefit.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Vox 2:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>She has manipulated her position and used it to her benefit.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>It’s something her opponents bring up a lot. Here’s President Trump earlier this year during his State of the Union address. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>It’s something her opponents bring up a lot. Here’s President Trump earlier this year during his State of the Union address. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>Let’s also ensure that members of Congress cannot corruptly profit from using insider information. They stood up for that, I can’t believe it. Did Nancy Pelosi stand up if she’s here? Doubt it. Pass the Stop Insider Trading Act without delay. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>Let’s also ensure that members of Congress cannot corruptly profit from using insider information. They stood up for that, I can’t believe it. Did Nancy Pelosi stand up if she’s here? Doubt it. Pass the Stop Insider Trading Act without delay. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A few months later, the House passed a stock trading ban for members of Congress, and Nancy Pelosi voted against it. Some Democrats had an issue with the bill because it included an unrelated voter ID provision, which many critics say is really a way of suppressing Democratic turnout in elections. And the stock trading bill? It wouldn’t have applied if it were the president. Profiteering by President Trump and his family, including prolific stock trading, are a trademark of his second term. But to many, the name Pelosi triggers allegations of corruption. In her second run as Speaker, Pelosi and President Trump became full-on enemies, locked in public brawls that would define both of their legacies. But Pelosi doesn’t really want to go there.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A few months later, the House passed a stock trading ban for members of Congress, and Nancy Pelosi voted against it. Some Democrats had an issue with the bill because it included an unrelated voter ID provision, which many critics say is really a way of suppressing Democratic turnout in elections. And the stock trading bill? It wouldn’t have applied if it were the president. Profiteering by President Trump and his family, including prolific stock trading, are a trademark of his second term. But to many, the name Pelosi triggers allegations of corruption. In her second run as Speaker, Pelosi and President Trump became full-on enemies, locked in public brawls that would define both of their legacies. But Pelosi doesn’t really want to go there.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I don’t spend a whole lot of time talking about Trump, so…\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I don’t spend a whole lot of time talking about Trump, so…\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I know he’s not your favorite.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I know he’s not your favorite.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, it’s not my favorite compared to almost any creature crawling the earth. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, it’s not my favorite compared to almost any creature crawling the earth. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Still, this creature has defined her final chapter in unexpected ways. From KQED, this is The Speaker. I’m Scott Shafer. Today, how Pelosi responds to what she and many see as a fundamental threat to democracy. President Trump. And with faith in the Democratic Party and public trust in U.S. Institutions at their lowest in decades, the shadow that hangs over her legacy. Accusations of insider stock trading in Congress. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Still, this creature has defined her final chapter in unexpected ways. From KQED, this is The Speaker. I’m Scott Shafer. Today, how Pelosi responds to what she and many see as a fundamental threat to democracy. President Trump. And with faith in the Democratic Party and public trust in U.S. Institutions at their lowest in decades, the shadow that hangs over her legacy. Accusations of insider stock trading in Congress. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi says she planned on retiring after the 2016 election. She would have been 76 years old, and she was assuming that a Democrat would win. You were really ready to say, that’s it, I’m done.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi says she planned on retiring after the 2016 election. She would have been 76 years old, and she was assuming that a Democrat would win. You were really ready to say, that’s it, I’m done.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Well, I was ready to say it a number of times, but I only thought I would go 10 years. I never thought I’d run for Congress, much less for leadership. And then the members, you have to stay, you have stay, you to stay. And so I did.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Well, I was ready to say it a number of times, but I only thought I would go 10 years. I never thought I’d run for Congress, much less for leadership. And then the members, you have to stay, you have stay, you to stay. And so I did.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She thought her crowning achievement, the Affordable Care Act, her baby, would be protected under a President Hillary Clinton. On November 8, 2016, Pelosi was in Washington with her colleagues, waiting for the returns to come in.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She thought her crowning achievement, the Affordable Care Act, her baby, would be protected under a President Hillary Clinton. On November 8, 2016, Pelosi was in Washington with her colleagues, waiting for the returns to come in.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>One of my colleagues was the chairman of the party in Philadelphia. And we were getting returns from him saying, they told us if we got over 500,000 in Philadelphia, we would carry Pennsylvania. So one night he’d say, it’s getting closer, but we’re okay, it was getting closer. Then finally he said, you know, the turnout from McCall, but you know just naming the names of some counties is just unprecedented. We’re not gonna be able to offset it. I was like getting kicked in the back by a mule.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>One of my colleagues was the chairman of the party in Philadelphia. And we were getting returns from him saying, they told us if we got over 500,000 in Philadelphia, we would carry Pennsylvania. So one night he’d say, it’s getting closer, but we’re okay, it was getting closer. Then finally he said, you know, the turnout from McCall, but you know just naming the names of some counties is just unprecedented. We’re not gonna be able to offset it. I was like getting kicked in the back by a mule.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>During his first campaign for president, Trump had leaned into people’s cynicism and mistrust of politicians.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>During his first campaign for president, Trump had leaned into people’s cynicism and mistrust of politicians.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>If we win on November 8th, we are going to drain the swamp in Washington, D.C. We’re draining the swamp.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>If we win on November 8th, we are going to drain the swamp in Washington, D.C. We’re draining the swamp.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>After he won, President Trump issued a flurry of executive orders and policies. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>After he won, President Trump issued a flurry of executive orders and policies. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>President Trump’s most recent executive order effectively banned citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. For at least 90 days. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>President Trump’s most recent executive order effectively banned citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. For at least 90 days. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>Today President Donald Trump is continuing to defend his administration’s policy. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>Today President Donald Trump is continuing to defend his administration’s policy. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>When you prosecute the parents for coming in illegally, which should happen, you have to take the children away. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>When you prosecute the parents for coming in illegally, which should happen, you have to take the children away. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>And, in 2017, when white supremacists rallied in Charlottesville, Virginia? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>And, in 2017, when white supremacists rallied in Charlottesville, Virginia? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>There are people, bodies laying on the ground right now.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>There are people, bodies laying on the ground right now.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>NAZIS GO HOME! \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>NAZIS GO HOME! \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In response to the violence, Trump said this.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In response to the violence, Trump said this.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>Very fine people on both sides \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>Very fine people on both sides \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the midst of all this, Pelosi and Democrats campaigned hard to defeat Republicans in the 2018 midterms. But economic unrest was starting to influence the Democratic Party’s politics. For years there had been discontent on the left about the 2008 bailout and economic disparity. A movement called Occupy Wall Street kicked off in 2011. The slogan was, we are the 99 percent. In 2016, Senator Bernie Sanders had been a grassroots presidential candidate, and he was popular. More than 40 percent of people who voted in the primaries wanted him to be the nominee.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the midst of all this, Pelosi and Democrats campaigned hard to defeat Republicans in the 2018 midterms. But economic unrest was starting to influence the Democratic Party’s politics. For years there had been discontent on the left about the 2008 bailout and economic disparity. A movement called Occupy Wall Street kicked off in 2011. The slogan was, we are the 99 percent. In 2016, Senator Bernie Sanders had been a grassroots presidential candidate, and he was popular. More than 40 percent of people who voted in the primaries wanted him to be the nominee.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bernie Sanders: \u003c/strong>The reason that we have done so well, the reason I believe we’re going to do so well in the Hampshire and in the other states that follow, the reason is the American people are saying no to a rigged economy. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bernie Sanders: \u003c/strong>The reason that we have done so well, the reason I believe we’re going to do so well in the Hampshire and in the other states that follow, the reason is the American people are saying no to a rigged economy. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Sanders had run on a message about economic inequality.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Sanders had run on a message about economic inequality.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bernie Sanders: \u003c/strong>They no longer want to see an economy in which the average American works longer hours for low wages while almost all new income and wealth is going to the top 1%.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bernie Sanders: \u003c/strong>They no longer want to see an economy in which the average American works longer hours for low wages while almost all new income and wealth is going to the top 1%.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Some people argue that this energy helped Democrats take back the House in 2018, two years into Trump’s presidency. They’d been out of power since the Tea Party had stormed into Congress almost a decade earlier. That election night, Pelosi took the stage again to the chants of \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Some people argue that this energy helped Democrats take back the House in 2018, two years into Trump’s presidency. They’d been out of power since the Tea Party had stormed into Congress almost a decade earlier. That election night, Pelosi took the stage again to the chants of \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Thank you all, thank you all very much, remember this feeling, know the power to win. Today is more than about Democrats and Republicans, it’s about restoring the Constitution’s checks and balances to the Trump administration.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Thank you all, thank you all very much, remember this feeling, know the power to win. Today is more than about Democrats and Republicans, it’s about restoring the Constitution’s checks and balances to the Trump administration.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>And with that election, a wave of newcomers with bold ideas, including four progressive women who became known as the Squad. Ayanna Pressley from Massachusetts, Rashida Tlaib from Michigan, Ilhan Omar from Minnesota, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, AOC, from New York. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>And with that election, a wave of newcomers with bold ideas, including four progressive women who became known as the Squad. Ayanna Pressley from Massachusetts, Rashida Tlaib from Michigan, Ilhan Omar from Minnesota, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, AOC, from New York. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>I think what we’ve seen is that working-class Americans want a clear champion and there is nothing radical about moral clarity in 2018.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>I think what we’ve seen is that working-class Americans want a clear champion and there is nothing radical about moral clarity in 2018.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>AOC is a democratic socialist, like Bernie Sanders. She defeated Joe Crowley, one of Pelosi’s top deputies in leadership. Many had actually seen Crowley as the person best positioned to become speaker after Pelosi left. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>AOC is a democratic socialist, like Bernie Sanders. She defeated Joe Crowley, one of Pelosi’s top deputies in leadership. Many had actually seen Crowley as the person best positioned to become speaker after Pelosi left. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>He didn’t pay enough attention to his district. That, you know, that’s really what it is. It was an election in the summer. So I had very low turnout. I mean, he was predicating his success on how things go in a full election. But AOC ran a great campaign and it was stunning because he’s terrific and respected and he was chair of the caucus, I think, at the time. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>He didn’t pay enough attention to his district. That, you know, that’s really what it is. It was an election in the summer. So I had very low turnout. I mean, he was predicating his success on how things go in a full election. But AOC ran a great campaign and it was stunning because he’s terrific and respected and he was chair of the caucus, I think, at the time. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Needless to say, there was some friction between the new members and the old guard. Before being sworn in, AOC joined a climate protest outside Pelosi’s office. People are holding yellow signs that say Green Jobs for All.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Needless to say, there was some friction between the new members and the old guard. Before being sworn in, AOC joined a climate protest outside Pelosi’s office. People are holding yellow signs that say Green Jobs for All.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>I just want to let you all know how proud I am of each and every single one of you for putting yourselves and your bodies and everything on the line to make sure that we save our planet, our generation, and our home.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>I just want to let you all know how proud I am of each and every single one of you for putting yourselves and your bodies and everything on the line to make sure that we save our planet, our generation, and our home.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi told me she was the wrong target for their protest.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi told me she was the wrong target for their protest.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>They should not have been in my office as a start because we had done more on climate than anybody.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>They should not have been in my office as a start because we had done more on climate than anybody.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Once they won back the House, some new, younger members were among those questioning whether Pelosi was the right leader for the House Democrats. But after cutting some deals, Pelosi was easily elected speaker for a second time. The squad cast their votes for her, too. Her swearing in was joyous.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Once they won back the House, some new, younger members were among those questioning whether Pelosi was the right leader for the House Democrats. But after cutting some deals, Pelosi was easily elected speaker for a second time. The squad cast their votes for her, too. Her swearing in was joyous.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I’d like to call my grandchildren up to be here when I take you, and any other children who want to join them. Come on, kids. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I’d like to call my grandchildren up to be here when I take you, and any other children who want to join them. Come on, kids. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She’d have her work cut out for her. In June of 2019, the House was considering an appropriations bill that would provide funds to process and detain migrants at the border, but also for an emergency food and shelter program, money to help deal with what people were calling a humanitarian crisis. This bill was being debated a year after the Trump administration rolled out and then backed down on a policy that criminally prosecuted all adults crossing the border without papers. The Zero Tolerance Policy meant children were separated from their parents. It was something AOC spoke about at an oversight committee hearing in July 2019. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She’d have her work cut out for her. In June of 2019, the House was considering an appropriations bill that would provide funds to process and detain migrants at the border, but also for an emergency food and shelter program, money to help deal with what people were calling a humanitarian crisis. This bill was being debated a year after the Trump administration rolled out and then backed down on a policy that criminally prosecuted all adults crossing the border without papers. The Zero Tolerance Policy meant children were separated from their parents. It was something AOC spoke about at an oversight committee hearing in July 2019. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>And what was worse about this, Mr. Chairman, was the fact that there were American flags hanging all over these facilities, that children being separated from their parents in front of an American flag.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>And what was worse about this, Mr. Chairman, was the fact that there were American flags hanging all over these facilities, that children being separated from their parents in front of an American flag.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Progressives didn’t want to give more money to the agencies that carried out Trump’s harsh border policies. Pelosi and other Democratic leaders negotiated with them, added additional health and safety standards for migrant children to the bill, but the squad still defected. They were the only Democrats to vote no on the House bill. You described the squad as just four votes. It was. That’s what it was. It was four votes This may sound harsh, but it’s how Pelosi sees things. They were a small obstacle that didn’t affect her vote count. But Pelosi would be challenged again by the progressive wing when she had to give up the House bill with stronger protections for a Senate version. She was disappointed that Senate Democrats hadn’t fought for a better bill, but she decided to compromise and push it through. That caused public outrage from House progressives. AOC took her issues with Pelosi public. She said in an interview with the Washington Post… That she felt the squad had been singled out by Pelosi, implied it was because they were four women of color. AOC’s chief of staff compared centrist Democrats to segregationists on Twitter. He asked why this so-called legislative mastermind, referring to Pelosi, couldn’t get more done on kitchen table issues. By some accounts, Pelosi was furious. Even today, you can hear the annoyance in her voice.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Progressives didn’t want to give more money to the agencies that carried out Trump’s harsh border policies. Pelosi and other Democratic leaders negotiated with them, added additional health and safety standards for migrant children to the bill, but the squad still defected. They were the only Democrats to vote no on the House bill. You described the squad as just four votes. It was. That’s what it was. It was four votes This may sound harsh, but it’s how Pelosi sees things. They were a small obstacle that didn’t affect her vote count. But Pelosi would be challenged again by the progressive wing when she had to give up the House bill with stronger protections for a Senate version. She was disappointed that Senate Democrats hadn’t fought for a better bill, but she decided to compromise and push it through. That caused public outrage from House progressives. AOC took her issues with Pelosi public. She said in an interview with the Washington Post… That she felt the squad had been singled out by Pelosi, implied it was because they were four women of color. AOC’s chief of staff compared centrist Democrats to segregationists on Twitter. He asked why this so-called legislative mastermind, referring to Pelosi, couldn’t get more done on kitchen table issues. By some accounts, Pelosi was furious. Even today, you can hear the annoyance in her voice.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>If you want to legislate, don’t be on airwaves criticizing the people whose votes you need. You can be here as a legislator where you need the votes of people for an issue that you may want to advance, or you can be an internet where you’re here to criticize your colleagues and expect them to vote for your bill.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>If you want to legislate, don’t be on airwaves criticizing the people whose votes you need. You can be here as a legislator where you need the votes of people for an issue that you may want to advance, or you can be an internet where you’re here to criticize your colleagues and expect them to vote for your bill.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In one closed-door meeting with her Democratic caucus, she told them to bring their grievances to her, not tweet about them to the public. She said at the end of the day, her goal was to help the children. She told them, some of you are here to make a beautiful pate, but we’re making sausage most of the time. Our producer Ariella asked Representative Ilhan Omar, part of the squad, about this.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In one closed-door meeting with her Democratic caucus, she told them to bring their grievances to her, not tweet about them to the public. She said at the end of the day, her goal was to help the children. She told them, some of you are here to make a beautiful pate, but we’re making sausage most of the time. Our producer Ariella asked Representative Ilhan Omar, part of the squad, about this.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ariella Markowitz: \u003c/strong>She was giving speeches about sausages versus pates and all of this. What do you think about that got under her skin? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ariella Markowitz: \u003c/strong>She was giving speeches about sausages versus pates and all of this. What do you think about that got under her skin? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ilhan Omar: \u003c/strong>I think she herself saw herself as a progressive and in some ways might’ve felt insulted that the progressive movement didn’t think of her as being one of them. And she felt like because she was the speaker and she’s the leader for the whole caucus and the whole House, that the decisions that she had to make had to be for the good of the whole.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ilhan Omar: \u003c/strong>I think she herself saw herself as a progressive and in some ways might’ve felt insulted that the progressive movement didn’t think of her as being one of them. And she felt like because she was the speaker and she’s the leader for the whole caucus and the whole House, that the decisions that she had to make had to be for the good of the whole.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now as I thought about these showdowns between the squad and the speaker, I remember how Pelosi herself had sort of ignored Congressional norms when she got to Washington. So I asked her how she felt about AOC. I wonder if you saw a little bit of yourself in her.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now as I thought about these showdowns between the squad and the speaker, I remember how Pelosi herself had sort of ignored Congressional norms when she got to Washington. So I asked her how she felt about AOC. I wonder if you saw a little bit of yourself in her.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t at all.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t at all.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I don’t know. Well, wait until you hear the question. Well, you just asked it, and I said no. I mean, whatBrase I’m thinking of is when you first got there in your very first speech, you talked about AIDS. You were kind of breaking the protocol a little bit. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I don’t know. Well, wait until you hear the question. Well, you just asked it, and I said no. I mean, whatBrase I’m thinking of is when you first got there in your very first speech, you talked about AIDS. You were kind of breaking the protocol a little bit. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>She’s operational, make no mistake, some of those squads are not. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>She’s operational, make no mistake, some of those squads are not. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Say what you mean by that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Say what you mean by that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Operational is that she knows that she wants to accomplish something. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Operational is that she knows that she wants to accomplish something. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Operational. This is one of Pelosi’s favorite words. It’s what Congresswoman Sala Burton said about Pelosi before she endorsed her back in 1987. So when Pelosi called AOC operational, this was a mark of respect. She’s learned how to get things done. Here’s the thing, Pelosi comes from progressive San Francisco. She thinks of herself as a liberal, cares about things like ending poverty, providing health care, and believes the government should be a force for good. But she values something else, too, maybe even more than anything else, being effective. It means working within a system she ultimately believes in to get things done, being willing to compromise in the process. But in this era of President Trump… Was being operational enough? Even though she loathed President Trump, Pelosi tried to enter their first meeting with an open mind. Out of respect for the institution.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Operational. This is one of Pelosi’s favorite words. It’s what Congresswoman Sala Burton said about Pelosi before she endorsed her back in 1987. So when Pelosi called AOC operational, this was a mark of respect. She’s learned how to get things done. Here’s the thing, Pelosi comes from progressive San Francisco. She thinks of herself as a liberal, cares about things like ending poverty, providing health care, and believes the government should be a force for good. But she values something else, too, maybe even more than anything else, being effective. It means working within a system she ultimately believes in to get things done, being willing to compromise in the process. But in this era of President Trump… Was being operational enough? Even though she loathed President Trump, Pelosi tried to enter their first meeting with an open mind. Out of respect for the institution.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>This is historic. It’s a meeting between the new president and the leadership of the Congress, bipartisan leadership in the Congress. I’ve been in that meeting many times with President Bush, Obama. It’s historic. And so I’m sitting there thinking, why don’t we begin? Will he quote the Bible? Will he talk about America and founders and what America means to us? And we talk about his family and what this… Means to him, how will he begin this meeting? He leans over on the desk like this, the table, and says, you know, I won the popular vote. It was totally offensive. So I thought, well, that’s not true. That’s not truth. And he said, well I’m not even counting California.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>This is historic. It’s a meeting between the new president and the leadership of the Congress, bipartisan leadership in the Congress. I’ve been in that meeting many times with President Bush, Obama. It’s historic. And so I’m sitting there thinking, why don’t we begin? Will he quote the Bible? Will he talk about America and founders and what America means to us? And we talk about his family and what this… Means to him, how will he begin this meeting? He leans over on the desk like this, the table, and says, you know, I won the popular vote. It was totally offensive. So I thought, well, that’s not true. That’s not truth. And he said, well I’m not even counting California.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The relationship went downhill from there. You may remember some of those moments, like in 2018 when Pelosi walked out of a meeting with Trump in a red coat and Armani sunglasses looking completely relaxed. She put her sunglasses on right in time for the photos. The image went viral.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The relationship went downhill from there. You may remember some of those moments, like in 2018 when Pelosi walked out of a meeting with Trump in a red coat and Armani sunglasses looking completely relaxed. She put her sunglasses on right in time for the photos. The image went viral.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>The new power suit for women, red coats, sunglasses, nerves of steel. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>The new power suit for women, red coats, sunglasses, nerves of steel. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I had no idea, I just put on my coat and walked out to the press, which is outside. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I had no idea, I just put on my coat and walked out to the press, which is outside. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Or you may remember her dressed in all white, standing behind the president. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Or you may remember her dressed in all white, standing behind the president. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>But Nancy Pelosi became the queen of condescending applause. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>But Nancy Pelosi became the queen of condescending applause. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Clapping sarcastically at Trump during his 2019 State of the Union address. She clearly wasn’t intimidated by him. After all, this is the same woman who called Bush incompetent on national TV and refused to apologize for it. To me, it seems like Pelosi was adapting to the moment. She was smart enough to sense that in this era of politics, it’s those viral images that stick with people, not the closed-door legislative rooms Pelosi was used cutting deals in. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Clapping sarcastically at Trump during his 2019 State of the Union address. She clearly wasn’t intimidated by him. After all, this is the same woman who called Bush incompetent on national TV and refused to apologize for it. To me, it seems like Pelosi was adapting to the moment. She was smart enough to sense that in this era of politics, it’s those viral images that stick with people, not the closed-door legislative rooms Pelosi was used cutting deals in. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>The fact is, people want to see moments. You know, I hear speeches, they want to see moments, what people are happy about is that I did that, that I pointed to him, that I walked out of the office, because it spoke to their, how they felt or believed at the time. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>The fact is, people want to see moments. You know, I hear speeches, they want to see moments, what people are happy about is that I did that, that I pointed to him, that I walked out of the office, because it spoke to their, how they felt or believed at the time. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She was getting under his skin. To those in the Trump 1.0 administration, Pelosi was an obstructionist. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She was getting under his skin. To those in the Trump 1.0 administration, Pelosi was an obstructionist. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mick Mulvaney: \u003c/strong>Nancy was just so difficult to work with. Again, she may take that as a badge of honor, and I get it, there’s a lot of Republicans who take their unwillingness to compromise with Democrats as a badge of honor. So she’s not unique in that, but she had zero interest in doing anything with Donald Trump.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mick Mulvaney: \u003c/strong>Nancy was just so difficult to work with. Again, she may take that as a badge of honor, and I get it, there’s a lot of Republicans who take their unwillingness to compromise with Democrats as a badge of honor. So she’s not unique in that, but she had zero interest in doing anything with Donald Trump.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s Mick Mulvaney, who was President Trump’s chief of staff when Pelosi regained the speakership. We talked to him last episode, a Tea Party guy who campaigned for his House seat against the Affordable Care Act and won. He said President Trump respected Pelosi at first.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s Mick Mulvaney, who was President Trump’s chief of staff when Pelosi regained the speakership. We talked to him last episode, a Tea Party guy who campaigned for his House seat against the Affordable Care Act and won. He said President Trump respected Pelosi at first.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mick Mulvaney: \u003c/strong>He respects strength and that’s certainly what she has. When she was doing what she was doing, she had a margin roughly the same size that Mike Johnson has today in the House. And she was able to corral her party and he respected that. But at the end of the day, she had zero interest in being with the guy and I think the country is worse for it. If they had wanted to sit down and cut some deals, they could have had a tremendous bipartisan deal on infrastructure. I even think they could’ve had a tremendous bipartisan on immigration. But it was fight, fight, fighting the whole time. And it was bitter and poisonous.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mick Mulvaney: \u003c/strong>He respects strength and that’s certainly what she has. When she was doing what she was doing, she had a margin roughly the same size that Mike Johnson has today in the House. And she was able to corral her party and he respected that. But at the end of the day, she had zero interest in being with the guy and I think the country is worse for it. If they had wanted to sit down and cut some deals, they could have had a tremendous bipartisan deal on infrastructure. I even think they could’ve had a tremendous bipartisan on immigration. But it was fight, fight, fighting the whole time. And it was bitter and poisonous.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>While Republicans felt Pelosi was just an obstacle to getting anything done, many Democrats were calling for Trump’s impeachment. But Pelosi was wary.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>While Republicans felt Pelosi was just an obstacle to getting anything done, many Democrats were calling for Trump’s impeachment. But Pelosi was wary.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>People wanted to impeach him just because he was obnoxious and dyed his hair orange. Everybody had a thing of he’s not really presidential. That’s not a cause for impeachment. You know what I’m saying?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>People wanted to impeach him just because he was obnoxious and dyed his hair orange. Everybody had a thing of he’s not really presidential. That’s not a cause for impeachment. You know what I’m saying?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But then, in the summer of 2019, President Trump gave Democrats their opportunity.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But then, in the summer of 2019, President Trump gave Democrats their opportunity.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I’ve said the only person who’s responsible for the impeachment of Donald Trump, not once but twice, is Donald Trump. He gave us no choice.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I’ve said the only person who’s responsible for the impeachment of Donald Trump, not once but twice, is Donald Trump. He gave us no choice.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A whistleblower said that in a phone call, Trump tried to get Ukrainian President Zelensky to investigate Trump’s rival in the upcoming election, Joe Biden, and his son Hunter. The White House released a transcript of the call, and President Trump tried to deflect to the debunked claim that Joe Biden was linked to a corruption scandal. And let me tell you something, Biden’s son is corrupt, and Biden is corrupt. To Pelosi, this attempt to interfere with the 2020 election was the unconstitutional violation Democrats could not ignore. This would be the grounds for the impeachment case.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A whistleblower said that in a phone call, Trump tried to get Ukrainian President Zelensky to investigate Trump’s rival in the upcoming election, Joe Biden, and his son Hunter. The White House released a transcript of the call, and President Trump tried to deflect to the debunked claim that Joe Biden was linked to a corruption scandal. And let me tell you something, Biden’s son is corrupt, and Biden is corrupt. To Pelosi, this attempt to interfere with the 2020 election was the unconstitutional violation Democrats could not ignore. This would be the grounds for the impeachment case.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>What he did was wrong. Now, different other things you could have included in that we said, you have to keep it simple. What is the thing that crosses the line, not just on its own might be grounds for impeachment, but not on the caliber of the Zelensky letter. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>What he did was wrong. Now, different other things you could have included in that we said, you have to keep it simple. What is the thing that crosses the line, not just on its own might be grounds for impeachment, but not on the caliber of the Zelensky letter. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But Pelosi didn’t revel in the impeachment, she actually silenced the applause after the impeachment vote with a stern glance and a hand gesture.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But Pelosi didn’t revel in the impeachment, she actually silenced the applause after the impeachment vote with a stern glance and a hand gesture.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Article 1 is adopted. The question is on adoption of Article 2.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Article 1 is adopted. The question is on adoption of Article 2.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>You can count votes. You were probably, I’m guessing, pretty confident the Senate would not convict, right? They needed 67 votes. Why did you think it was important to go ahead and really start a process that you knew ultimately you would not?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>You can count votes. You were probably, I’m guessing, pretty confident the Senate would not convict, right? They needed 67 votes. Why did you think it was important to go ahead and really start a process that you knew ultimately you would not?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We did succeed. We impeached him twice. But you think that we should be guided by what the Senate might do? You think that, we would say, well, the president has committed impregnable offenses of highest magnitude, and we shouldn’t do that because we don’t know what some senators are going to do? No. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We did succeed. We impeached him twice. But you think that we should be guided by what the Senate might do? You think that, we would say, well, the president has committed impregnable offenses of highest magnitude, and we shouldn’t do that because we don’t know what some senators are going to do? No. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>I am thrilled to report to you tonight that our economy is the best it has ever been. Our military is completely rebuilt, with its power being unmatched anywhere in the world, and it’s not even close. It was February\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>I am thrilled to report to you tonight that our economy is the best it has ever been. Our military is completely rebuilt, with its power being unmatched anywhere in the world, and it’s not even close. It was February\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The day before the Senate voted to acquit Trump of both impeachment charges. President Trump was giving his State of the Union speech, and Pelosi went a step further than she’d ever gone before. She was sitting behind Trump, in her house. He’d chosen that night to honor right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh, who held notoriously homophobic views. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The day before the Senate voted to acquit Trump of both impeachment charges. President Trump was giving his State of the Union speech, and Pelosi went a step further than she’d ever gone before. She was sitting behind Trump, in her house. He’d chosen that night to honor right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh, who held notoriously homophobic views. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>And Rush, in recognition of all that you have done for our nation, the millions of people a day that you speak to and that you inspire, I am proud to announce tonight that you will be receiving our country’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>And Rush, in recognition of all that you have done for our nation, the millions of people a day that you speak to and that you inspire, I am proud to announce tonight that you will be receiving our country’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi sat there, lips pursed, looking down at the printed speech, looking away from the balcony where Limbaugh was, and toward her caucus in the audience. As Trump finished his speech, saying the best was yet to come, she stood up, not clapping, but ripping up the president’s printed remarks two or three pages at a time, biting her lip. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi sat there, lips pursed, looking down at the printed speech, looking away from the balcony where Limbaugh was, and toward her caucus in the audience. As Trump finished his speech, saying the best was yet to come, she stood up, not clapping, but ripping up the president’s printed remarks two or three pages at a time, biting her lip. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I didn’t intend to do that. It just was a manifesto of lies. And I wasn’t just gonna let that stand. I just wasn’t gonna let it stand. As courteous as we are to a guest in our house, when he abuses that courtesy, when he lies there the whole time, gives a medal of freedom to an anti-gay, blah, blah, and our house. Do that at the White House. We don’t agree with your choice, but that’s your choice. You’re the president, but don’t come here and sully the House of Representatives chamber. With your obnoxious behavior. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I didn’t intend to do that. It just was a manifesto of lies. And I wasn’t just gonna let that stand. I just wasn’t gonna let it stand. As courteous as we are to a guest in our house, when he abuses that courtesy, when he lies there the whole time, gives a medal of freedom to an anti-gay, blah, blah, and our house. Do that at the White House. We don’t agree with your choice, but that’s your choice. You’re the president, but don’t come here and sully the House of Representatives chamber. With your obnoxious behavior. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>Pelosi, at her heart, believes in institutions. She respects the separation of powers, the three branches of government, and the staying power of those institutions. But to me, it seemed like at that moment something changed for her, not even standing with polite, respectful applause for the president as she did behind President George W. Bush for both of his State of the Union addresses when she was speaker, instead A stunning act of defiance on primetime television. Nine months later, Joe Biden won the presidential election. Trump was out. On January 6, 2021, Pelosi, along with Vice President Mike Pence, were overseeing the certification of the election. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>Pelosi, at her heart, believes in institutions. She respects the separation of powers, the three branches of government, and the staying power of those institutions. But to me, it seemed like at that moment something changed for her, not even standing with polite, respectful applause for the president as she did behind President George W. Bush for both of his State of the Union addresses when she was speaker, instead A stunning act of defiance on primetime television. Nine months later, Joe Biden won the presidential election. Trump was out. On January 6, 2021, Pelosi, along with Vice President Mike Pence, were overseeing the certification of the election. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We didn’t anticipate violence. We didn’t expect the President of the United States to incite an insurrection.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We didn’t anticipate violence. We didn’t expect the President of the United States to incite an insurrection.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>We’re starting to get surrounded. They’re taking the north-west scaffolding. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>We’re starting to get surrounded. They’re taking the north-west scaffolding. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Protesters attack the west side of the Capitol, where presidential inauguration ceremonies are held. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Protesters attack the west side of the Capitol, where presidential inauguration ceremonies are held. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Security came to me and they said we’re taking you out I said I can handle this guy you know we’re ready \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Security came to me and they said we’re taking you out I said I can handle this guy you know we’re ready \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>We are walking over now to the tunnel\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>We are walking over now to the tunnel\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We could see on TV, because when you’re in the chamber, you can’t see. You see on tv what was happening, that they were coming to the Capitol. It’s really hard to explain. This is the citadel of democracy to the world. And these people are coming in, breaking windows, and they go in, and we’re seeing them go into the Capitol with Dixie flags, you know, Confederate flags, under the dome that Lincoln built when he was president. He built it during the Civil War. People said to him, use the steel for the war and the personnel for the War. He said. No, we have to show the world that we are resilient. So they continue with the dome. Under Lincoln’s dome, Confederate flags. One guy with a shirt, six million Jews were not enough. Auschwitz. That’s. What this was, assaulting police, all the rest of that, defecating on the floor. I say this because this brute who was president now wants to give them money for killing or endangering the lives of police officers. They were gonna get a bullet in my effing brain. They use the F word a lot about me throughout the whole thing. They were going to hang the vice president. Gallows for him.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We could see on TV, because when you’re in the chamber, you can’t see. You see on tv what was happening, that they were coming to the Capitol. It’s really hard to explain. This is the citadel of democracy to the world. And these people are coming in, breaking windows, and they go in, and we’re seeing them go into the Capitol with Dixie flags, you know, Confederate flags, under the dome that Lincoln built when he was president. He built it during the Civil War. People said to him, use the steel for the war and the personnel for the War. He said. No, we have to show the world that we are resilient. So they continue with the dome. Under Lincoln’s dome, Confederate flags. One guy with a shirt, six million Jews were not enough. Auschwitz. That’s. What this was, assaulting police, all the rest of that, defecating on the floor. I say this because this brute who was president now wants to give them money for killing or endangering the lives of police officers. They were gonna get a bullet in my effing brain. They use the F word a lot about me throughout the whole thing. They were going to hang the vice president. Gallows for him.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>No doubt, many in the mob hated Pelosi. They came looking for her. They broke into her speaker’s office. A man put his feet up on her desk. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>No doubt, many in the mob hated Pelosi. They came looking for her. They broke into her speaker’s office. A man put his feet up on her desk. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>Where are you Nancy? We’re looking for you! She’s in jail!\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>Where are you Nancy? We’re looking for you! She’s in jail!\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Have you ever, you know, given yourself the permission to think about what would have happened if they had found you?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Have you ever, you know, given yourself the permission to think about what would have happened if they had found you?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Well, here’s the thing that I thought. I wasn’t really thinking so much about my personal safety. I was thinking about my grandson who was with me. His mother, Alexandra, took the boys to see an historic event, the transfer of power.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Well, here’s the thing that I thought. I wasn’t really thinking so much about my personal safety. I was thinking about my grandson who was with me. His mother, Alexandra, took the boys to see an historic event, the transfer of power.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But something fundamental had broken.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But something fundamental had broken.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>And this vile creature, the vilest creature to ever crawl the face of the earth. And they said, well, what about Hitler? I said, he wasn’t president of the United States. Insights are an insurrection, sits in his office, and then won’t let the police, the National Guard come and then lies about it the whole time. I called the governor of Virginia. They said they had their troops ready. These people are so idiotic, but let’s put that over all of them. The secretary of the army who had the jurisdiction to. So I have to talk to my boss. That’s the secretary of defense. Haven’t you done that yet? Well, this is hard. It’s complicated. It takes time. I said, they have been attacking the Capitol. Well, I have to go ask my boss and well, you have to have authority at the location. I said there, look, authority is there. You need to be able to send the national guard. But they may, they avoided everything about it because their boss. The Commander-in-Chief, who can say over any of that, was just holding them back. And even some of the Republicans were asking the President to call off those guys, and he still wouldn’t do it. This is, I want to tell you something, this is a demonic figure, this guy who is unfortunately in the White House.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>And this vile creature, the vilest creature to ever crawl the face of the earth. And they said, well, what about Hitler? I said, he wasn’t president of the United States. Insights are an insurrection, sits in his office, and then won’t let the police, the National Guard come and then lies about it the whole time. I called the governor of Virginia. They said they had their troops ready. These people are so idiotic, but let’s put that over all of them. The secretary of the army who had the jurisdiction to. So I have to talk to my boss. That’s the secretary of defense. Haven’t you done that yet? Well, this is hard. It’s complicated. It takes time. I said, they have been attacking the Capitol. Well, I have to go ask my boss and well, you have to have authority at the location. I said there, look, authority is there. You need to be able to send the national guard. But they may, they avoided everything about it because their boss. The Commander-in-Chief, who can say over any of that, was just holding them back. And even some of the Republicans were asking the President to call off those guys, and he still wouldn’t do it. This is, I want to tell you something, this is a demonic figure, this guy who is unfortunately in the White House.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I know you’re very religious. Did you pray?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I know you’re very religious. Did you pray?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Of course we prayed, prayed for our country. We prayed for those who were under assault.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Of course we prayed, prayed for our country. We prayed for those who were under assault.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A few hours after the attack, authorities confirmed the Capitol had been secured. Congress was going to continue certifying the election results\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A few hours after the attack, authorities confirmed the Capitol had been secured. Congress was going to continue certifying the election results\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I said, you know what, we’re going to the floor. That’s where this assault occurred, that’s where we’re going back to show the world.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I said, you know what, we’re going to the floor. That’s where this assault occurred, that’s where we’re going back to show the world.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the early hours of the morning on January 7th, 2021, the election was certified. In his final days in office, Nancy Pelosi would lead another impeachment against President Trump for inciting the insurrection. The FBI investigated the rioters. There were prosecutions. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the early hours of the morning on January 7th, 2021, the election was certified. In his final days in office, Nancy Pelosi would lead another impeachment against President Trump for inciting the insurrection. The FBI investigated the rioters. There were prosecutions. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>The Arkansas man who was photographed on January 6th with his feet up on Nancy Pelosi’s desk was sentenced yesterday. He got four and a half years in prison. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>The Arkansas man who was photographed on January 6th with his feet up on Nancy Pelosi’s desk was sentenced yesterday. He got four and a half years in prison. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Biden became president. Working together in the midst of the COVID pandemic, he and Pelosi muscled some big bills through a divided Congress. The Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS and Science Act. But during her last years as speaker, Pelosi made headlines for another reason. In 2021, at a press conference, a reporter from Business Insider asked Pelosi a question.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Biden became president. Working together in the midst of the COVID pandemic, he and Pelosi muscled some big bills through a divided Congress. The Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS and Science Act. But during her last years as speaker, Pelosi made headlines for another reason. In 2021, at a press conference, a reporter from Business Insider asked Pelosi a question.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Business Insider Reporter: \u003c/strong>Should members of Congress and their spouses be banned from trading individual stocks while serving in Congress? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Business Insider Reporter: \u003c/strong>Should members of Congress and their spouses be banned from trading individual stocks while serving in Congress? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I don’t know to this second one, we have a responsibility to report in the stock, on the stock but I’m not familiar with that five month review but if people aren’t reporting they should be. Because this is a free market and people, we have a free-market economy, they should be able to participate in that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I don’t know to this second one, we have a responsibility to report in the stock, on the stock but I’m not familiar with that five month review but if people aren’t reporting they should be. Because this is a free market and people, we have a free-market economy, they should be able to participate in that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi was firm in her response. No ban on stock trading. At that moment, she didn’t see the backlash, but it had been coming for years. Back in 2011, Pelosi had just gotten the Affordable Care Act across the finish line. She lost the speakership, but was still leader of House Democrats. Then, the CBS News magazine 60 Minutes published a bombshell investigation.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi was firm in her response. No ban on stock trading. At that moment, she didn’t see the backlash, but it had been coming for years. Back in 2011, Pelosi had just gotten the Affordable Care Act across the finish line. She lost the speakership, but was still leader of House Democrats. Then, the CBS News magazine 60 Minutes published a bombshell investigation.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Peter Schweizer: \u003c/strong>There are all sorts of forms of honest grafts that congressmen engage in that allow them to become very, very wealthy. So it’s not illegal, but I think it’s highly unethical. I think it’s highly offensive and wrong.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Peter Schweizer: \u003c/strong>There are all sorts of forms of honest grafts that congressmen engage in that allow them to become very, very wealthy. So it’s not illegal, but I think it’s highly unethical. I think it’s highly offensive and wrong.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s Peter Schweizer, the main source in the story. At the time, Schweizer was a fellow at the Hoover Institute, a conservative think tank. He’d been criticized as early as 1993 for fabricating sources and events in his book, Friendly Spies. He’d go on to publish Clinton Cash in 2015, a book that Media Matters concluded contained over 20 errors, fabrications, and distortions. On 60 Minutes, Schweiser claimed that members of Congress… Have been trading stocks based on inside information.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s Peter Schweizer, the main source in the story. At the time, Schweizer was a fellow at the Hoover Institute, a conservative think tank. He’d been criticized as early as 1993 for fabricating sources and events in his book, Friendly Spies. He’d go on to publish Clinton Cash in 2015, a book that Media Matters concluded contained over 20 errors, fabrications, and distortions. On 60 Minutes, Schweiser claimed that members of Congress… Have been trading stocks based on inside information.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Peter Schweizer: \u003c/strong>We know that during the health care debate, people were trading health care stocks. We know during the financial crisis of 2008, they were getting out of the market before the rest of America really knew what was going on.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Peter Schweizer: \u003c/strong>We know that during the health care debate, people were trading health care stocks. We know during the financial crisis of 2008, they were getting out of the market before the rest of America really knew what was going on.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The 60 Minutes story didn’t exclusively focus on Pelosi. They called out other lawmakers, too, including Republican Speaker John Boehner. But the report looked at an incident from 2008. Pelosi’s husband, Paul, had bought shares of stock from Visa, the credit card company. The report called into question whether the family’s investment influenced Pelosi’s decision-making around regulations to protect credit card consumers. To investigate this, the 60 Minutes correspondent, Steve Croft, went to a press conference and asked Pelosi about it.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The 60 Minutes story didn’t exclusively focus on Pelosi. They called out other lawmakers, too, including Republican Speaker John Boehner. But the report looked at an incident from 2008. Pelosi’s husband, Paul, had bought shares of stock from Visa, the credit card company. The report called into question whether the family’s investment influenced Pelosi’s decision-making around regulations to protect credit card consumers. To investigate this, the 60 Minutes correspondent, Steve Croft, went to a press conference and asked Pelosi about it.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft: \u003c/strong>Madam Leader, I wanted to ask you why you and your husband back in March of 2008 accepted and participated in a very large IPO deal from Visa, at a time there was major legislation affecting the credit card companies making its way through the house, and did you consider that to be a conflict of interest.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft: \u003c/strong>Madam Leader, I wanted to ask you why you and your husband back in March of 2008 accepted and participated in a very large IPO deal from Visa, at a time there was major legislation affecting the credit card companies making its way through the house, and did you consider that to be a conflict of interest.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I don’t know what your point is of your question. Is there some point that you want to make with that? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I don’t know what your point is of your question. Is there some point that you want to make with that? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>This response is classic Pelosi, full-throated denial.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>This response is classic Pelosi, full-throated denial.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>It’s not true, and that’s that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>It’s not true, and that’s that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I don’t understand what part’s not true.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I don’t understand what part’s not true.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Yes, sir, that I would act upon an investment\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Yes, sir, that I would act upon an investment\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>After the piece aired, Pelosi’s office put out a statement. It denied that her decisions about regulating credit card companies were swayed by her husband’s stock purchases. The statement said, quote, It is very troubling that 60 Minutes would base their reporting off of an already discredited conservative author who has made a career out of attacking Democrats. Peter Schweizer was a close ally of Steve Bannon, one of Trump’s top advisors. Schweizer would become editor of the far-right website Breitbart News. It’s true that Democrats had introduced a bill that would regulate credit card swipe fees in the House and that the bill died later that year. But Pelosi said it wasn’t because she was trying to help her husband’s portfolio. By the time the bill made it out of committee, Pelosi said, it was too late to bring the for a vote before the session ended. The Democratic congressman who introduced the bill, John Conyers from Michigan, said even if they’d somehow managed to pass it, President Bush would probably have vetoed it. So Pelosi said they waited until President Obama was in the White House to push card regulations through. In 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act included a cap on debit card swipe fees and other protections for credit card consumers. There are lots of moving parts here. It’s hard to say definitively what happened or why. But the accusations were very powerful. They touched a nerve. In 2012, public anger about the issue of stock trading in Congress was mounting. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>After the piece aired, Pelosi’s office put out a statement. It denied that her decisions about regulating credit card companies were swayed by her husband’s stock purchases. The statement said, quote, It is very troubling that 60 Minutes would base their reporting off of an already discredited conservative author who has made a career out of attacking Democrats. Peter Schweizer was a close ally of Steve Bannon, one of Trump’s top advisors. Schweizer would become editor of the far-right website Breitbart News. It’s true that Democrats had introduced a bill that would regulate credit card swipe fees in the House and that the bill died later that year. But Pelosi said it wasn’t because she was trying to help her husband’s portfolio. By the time the bill made it out of committee, Pelosi said, it was too late to bring the for a vote before the session ended. The Democratic congressman who introduced the bill, John Conyers from Michigan, said even if they’d somehow managed to pass it, President Bush would probably have vetoed it. So Pelosi said they waited until President Obama was in the White House to push card regulations through. In 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act included a cap on debit card swipe fees and other protections for credit card consumers. There are lots of moving parts here. It’s hard to say definitively what happened or why. But the accusations were very powerful. They touched a nerve. In 2012, public anger about the issue of stock trading in Congress was mounting. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft: \u003c/strong>Both the House and the\u003cem> \u003c/em>Senate in a rare display of bipartisanship overwhelmingly passed the Stock Act, which prohibits its members from trading on non-public information gathered during the course of their duties.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft: \u003c/strong>Both the House and the\u003cem> \u003c/em>Senate in a rare display of bipartisanship overwhelmingly passed the Stock Act, which prohibits its members from trading on non-public information gathered during the course of their duties.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Congress passed the Stock Act, stopped trading on congressional knowledge. It’s been said sunlight is the best disinfectant, meaning transparency. The Stock Act required members of Congress to disclose their trades within 30 to 45 days of making them. But the issue didn’t go away. Actually, with the information available to the public, people became more aware of how much money Congress members were making on stock trading. There are even apps you can use to track and literally copy the same stock trades the Pelosi’s and other members of Congress do. When Pelosi came to Congress, she and her husband were already wealthy. Her husband is a finance guy. The family had at least $610,000 worth in stocks. In today’s money, that’s something like 1.8 million. The stock research platform, Quiver Quantitative, estimates that her family currently holds around $135 million in publicly traded assets. In 2021, Pelosi ranked in the top 25 richest people in Congress. Here’s Hillary Brossith, she’s executive director at OpenSecrets, a non-profit that tracks money and politics. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Congress passed the Stock Act, stopped trading on congressional knowledge. It’s been said sunlight is the best disinfectant, meaning transparency. The Stock Act required members of Congress to disclose their trades within 30 to 45 days of making them. But the issue didn’t go away. Actually, with the information available to the public, people became more aware of how much money Congress members were making on stock trading. There are even apps you can use to track and literally copy the same stock trades the Pelosi’s and other members of Congress do. When Pelosi came to Congress, she and her husband were already wealthy. Her husband is a finance guy. The family had at least $610,000 worth in stocks. In today’s money, that’s something like 1.8 million. The stock research platform, Quiver Quantitative, estimates that her family currently holds around $135 million in publicly traded assets. In 2021, Pelosi ranked in the top 25 richest people in Congress. Here’s Hillary Brossith, she’s executive director at OpenSecrets, a non-profit that tracks money and politics. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Hilary Braseth: \u003c/strong>We often find that some of the highest drivers of traffic to our site are citizens who are curious about the net worth of any given member of Congress. And Nancy Pelosi, I think in many ways, is one of the main profiles that we often see folks looking up, perhaps because she has quite high of a net worth.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Hilary Braseth: \u003c/strong>We often find that some of the highest drivers of traffic to our site are citizens who are curious about the net worth of any given member of Congress. And Nancy Pelosi, I think in many ways, is one of the main profiles that we often see folks looking up, perhaps because she has quite high of a net worth.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now, owning stocks can benefit anyone, but the richer you are and the more stocks you own, the more you make when the market goes up. Having private briefings, like members of Congress do, can give them a leg up before the market reacts to news. Business Insider recently published an investigation that found that dozens of Congress members have violated federal conflict of interest laws. Pelosi wasn’t on that list, but many of her colleagues were accused of disclosing after the required disclosure window. And a few were accused of insider trading. It seems obvious that banning members of Congress from trading stocks wouldn’t just stop the practice from happening, but would also remove the appearance of a conflict, but Pelosi opposed it. When Pelosi first ran for her seat back in 1987, her opponents argued that Pelosi’s wealth would put her out of touch with working class people. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now, owning stocks can benefit anyone, but the richer you are and the more stocks you own, the more you make when the market goes up. Having private briefings, like members of Congress do, can give them a leg up before the market reacts to news. Business Insider recently published an investigation that found that dozens of Congress members have violated federal conflict of interest laws. Pelosi wasn’t on that list, but many of her colleagues were accused of disclosing after the required disclosure window. And a few were accused of insider trading. It seems obvious that banning members of Congress from trading stocks wouldn’t just stop the practice from happening, but would also remove the appearance of a conflict, but Pelosi opposed it. When Pelosi first ran for her seat back in 1987, her opponents argued that Pelosi’s wealth would put her out of touch with working class people. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carol Ruth Silver: \u003c/strong>How can she relate to people like me, a single parent, working mother, or somebody else? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carol Ruth Silver: \u003c/strong>How can she relate to people like me, a single parent, working mother, or somebody else? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Fast forward to 2020. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, Pelosi went on the James Corden show.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Fast forward to 2020. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, Pelosi went on the James Corden show.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>James Corden: \u003c/strong>Welcome back, we’re here with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and we’ve asked her to share something from her home for late, late show and tell. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>James Corden: \u003c/strong>Welcome back, we’re here with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and we’ve asked her to share something from her home for late, late show and tell. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the segment she showed her freezer full of ice cream.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the segment she showed her freezer full of ice cream.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Speaker Pelosi, what have you found? I don’t know what I would have done if ice cream were not invented.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Speaker Pelosi, what have you found? I don’t know what I would have done if ice cream were not invented.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>People were losing their jobs, terrified about the economy. Trump’s reelection campaign seized on an opportunity to punch back at Pelosi. They posted a video on YouTube called Let Them Eat Ice Cream, Nancy Antoinette, a reference to the infamous Queen of France. It featured the James Corden interview with some creative edits. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>People were losing their jobs, terrified about the economy. Trump’s reelection campaign seized on an opportunity to punch back at Pelosi. They posted a video on YouTube called Let Them Eat Ice Cream, Nancy Antoinette, a reference to the infamous Queen of France. It featured the James Corden interview with some creative edits. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video: \u003c/strong>Speaker Pelosi, what are you gonna share with us from your home? Chocolate candy. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video: \u003c/strong>Speaker Pelosi, what are you gonna share with us from your home? Chocolate candy. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video: \u003c/strong>Thousands have been forced to wait for hours at food banks all across the country. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video: \u003c/strong>Thousands have been forced to wait for hours at food banks all across the country. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video:\u003c/strong>Oh my chocolate and then we have some other chocolate \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video:\u003c/strong>Oh my chocolate and then we have some other chocolate \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>It was a partisan attack, but like her opposition to the congressional stock trading ban, the moment highlighted one of Pelosi’s weaknesses. She can be a little tone deaf to how her own behavior strikes others and how it stokes anger. When we started making this podcast, I knew I wanted to ask Pelosi about congressional stock trading, but I have to say I wasn’t looking forward to bringing it up. I know how she can sometimes go into attack mode when she’s asked about a topic she doesn’t like. She completely rejects accusations that she used knowledge gained as a member of Congress to make favorable stock transactions. She defended her stock trades to me as something everyone does.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>It was a partisan attack, but like her opposition to the congressional stock trading ban, the moment highlighted one of Pelosi’s weaknesses. She can be a little tone deaf to how her own behavior strikes others and how it stokes anger. When we started making this podcast, I knew I wanted to ask Pelosi about congressional stock trading, but I have to say I wasn’t looking forward to bringing it up. I know how she can sometimes go into attack mode when she’s asked about a topic she doesn’t like. She completely rejects accusations that she used knowledge gained as a member of Congress to make favorable stock transactions. She defended her stock trades to me as something everyone does.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>My point of view is if family has investments, stock, I’m not talking about big deal. Most people don’t even realize that their 401k is in the stock market. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>My point of view is if family has investments, stock, I’m not talking about big deal. Most people don’t even realize that their 401k is in the stock market. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But there are a lot of people who’ve come to Congress and left with a lot more money than they got there. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But there are a lot of people who’ve come to Congress and left with a lot more money than they got there. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>If they’re doing something illegal, then they should be charged with that. They have investigated me personally, politically, economically, all the time. They have never come up with anything. They’ve spent a lot of money and a lot time. They can say I have cloven feet and horns in my head and I’m a devil and the rest of that, but they’ve never come with anything that I did anything wrong in Congress. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>If they’re doing something illegal, then they should be charged with that. They have investigated me personally, politically, economically, all the time. They have never come up with anything. They’ve spent a lot of money and a lot time. They can say I have cloven feet and horns in my head and I’m a devil and the rest of that, but they’ve never come with anything that I did anything wrong in Congress. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Josh Hawley was on Fox News saying that, you know, insider trading corruption should be prosecuted.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Josh Hawley was on Fox News saying that, you know, insider trading corruption should be prosecuted.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Not me. Nobody’s ever accused me… \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Not me. Nobody’s ever accused me… \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Well, he was referring to you. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Well, he was referring to you. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In 2023, Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri introduced the Pelosi act preventing elected leaders from owning securities and investments. I tried asking Pelosi why she didn’t try and pass a ban when she was leader. So you don’t feel that not getting that passed is a negative part of your legacy.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In 2023, Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri introduced the Pelosi act preventing elected leaders from owning securities and investments. I tried asking Pelosi why she didn’t try and pass a ban when she was leader. So you don’t feel that not getting that passed is a negative part of your legacy.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I don’t at all, because the people who, the members didn’t, it’s up to the members to get something passed like that. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I don’t at all, because the people who, the members didn’t, it’s up to the members to get something passed like that. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Yeah, although as leader, you have a lot of say in what the caucus wants to do. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Yeah, although as leader, you have a lot of say in what the caucus wants to do. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t. All you need is a few people to say, we’re not doing this. And some of them were in the leadership. They just thought it was insulting to the members to say you don’t have any values and you don’t have any judgment. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t. All you need is a few people to say, we’re not doing this. And some of them were in the leadership. They just thought it was insulting to the members to say you don’t have any values and you don’t have any judgment. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But now she says she does support a ban on stock trading for members of Congress. So I kept pushing her. What changed? You oppose that for many years and I’m wondering.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But now she says she does support a ban on stock trading for members of Congress. So I kept pushing her. What changed? You oppose that for many years and I’m wondering.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t pose it for many years. I posed it when they suggested it, and then Kalkus said they won it and I supported it. It didn’t come forward because there weren’t the votes to bring it forward.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t pose it for many years. I posed it when they suggested it, and then Kalkus said they won it and I supported it. It didn’t come forward because there weren’t the votes to bring it forward.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>At the top of the episode, I mentioned a stock trading ban passed Congress in July. But Pelosi didn’t vote for it, because she says it exempted the president.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>At the top of the episode, I mentioned a stock trading ban passed Congress in July. But Pelosi didn’t vote for it, because she says it exempted the president.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>It was a terrible bill. And we wanted it to be more comprehensive, including the President of the United States, because they would never get that signed by the President of the United States. But if you look at that bill, it is totally incomplete. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>It was a terrible bill. And we wanted it to be more comprehensive, including the President of the United States, because they would never get that signed by the President of the United States. But if you look at that bill, it is totally incomplete. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now, Pelosi doesn’t like to back down, especially when she feels like these are partisan attacks. But she also knows that appearances matter, and they can undercut trust in elected officials. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now, Pelosi doesn’t like to back down, especially when she feels like these are partisan attacks. But she also knows that appearances matter, and they can undercut trust in elected officials. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We want to do whatever it takes, and that means even this issue, to restore the confidence people have in the system. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We want to do whatever it takes, and that means even this issue, to restore the confidence people have in the system. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Hilary Braseth of Open Secrets again.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Hilary Braseth of Open Secrets again.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Hilary Braseth: \u003c/strong>Earlier this year, there was a survey that roughly 75% of the country thinks that there is too much money in politics and does not like it. And so this really presents a quandary that those who get elected into public office tend to benefit from the system as it’s designed and don’t have much incentive to change the system or to create tighter rules around how much money they can raise, whether or not they can trade stocks based on. Knowledge they might be privy to.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Hilary Braseth: \u003c/strong>Earlier this year, there was a survey that roughly 75% of the country thinks that there is too much money in politics and does not like it. And so this really presents a quandary that those who get elected into public office tend to benefit from the system as it’s designed and don’t have much incentive to change the system or to create tighter rules around how much money they can raise, whether or not they can trade stocks based on. Knowledge they might be privy to.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Senate Democrats ended up blocking the stock trading ban. They promised future reform, but needless to say, any ban passed now wouldn’t take effect until Pelosi leaves office. It’s been over five years since the violent riot at the Capitol. A lot has changed since then. Back in 2018, to round up votes to regain the gavel, Pelosi agreed to a four-year limit on her second speakership. And in 2023, after Democrats lost the House, she stepped down from leadership. President Trump is back in power after defeating former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024. Republicans also maintain control of the House. And after he came back into office, President Trump pardoned those who’d been successfully prosecuted for their role in the January 6th attacks. The formal office of the Speaker of the House is historic and spacious, with vaulted ceilings and ornate wooden furniture, outer sitting areas full of comfortable couches and arm chairs. From a window you can see out across the National Mall. But that’s no longer Pelosi’s domain. Her party’s in the minority now, and her current office? It’s nice enough, but decidedly un-grand. It’s relatively cramped, packed with memorabilia. Colorful gavels, gifts from her constituents, chocolate for people who come to visit her, and sitting on a table, a pair of pink boxing gloves with her initials, NP, bedazzled in rhinestones, a gift from her friend Barbara Boxer. They were a little joke, boxing gloves from a boxer, but I think they really fit. No matter the cost, she goes down swinging. She’s not the speaker anymore, but she’s still Pelosi, calling shots behind the scenes, doing her best to shape the future of a Democratic party that’s up for grabs.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Senate Democrats ended up blocking the stock trading ban. They promised future reform, but needless to say, any ban passed now wouldn’t take effect until Pelosi leaves office. It’s been over five years since the violent riot at the Capitol. A lot has changed since then. Back in 2018, to round up votes to regain the gavel, Pelosi agreed to a four-year limit on her second speakership. And in 2023, after Democrats lost the House, she stepped down from leadership. President Trump is back in power after defeating former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024. Republicans also maintain control of the House. And after he came back into office, President Trump pardoned those who’d been successfully prosecuted for their role in the January 6th attacks. The formal office of the Speaker of the House is historic and spacious, with vaulted ceilings and ornate wooden furniture, outer sitting areas full of comfortable couches and arm chairs. From a window you can see out across the National Mall. But that’s no longer Pelosi’s domain. Her party’s in the minority now, and her current office? It’s nice enough, but decidedly un-grand. It’s relatively cramped, packed with memorabilia. Colorful gavels, gifts from her constituents, chocolate for people who come to visit her, and sitting on a table, a pair of pink boxing gloves with her initials, NP, bedazzled in rhinestones, a gift from her friend Barbara Boxer. They were a little joke, boxing gloves from a boxer, but I think they really fit. No matter the cost, she goes down swinging. She’s not the speaker anymore, but she’s still Pelosi, calling shots behind the scenes, doing her best to shape the future of a Democratic party that’s up for grabs.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>We’re seeing a lot of turmoil in the Democratic Party in terms of candidates. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>We’re seeing a lot of turmoil in the Democratic Party in terms of candidates. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I disagree with your terminology. A lot of turmoil in the Democratic Party. There isn’t a lot of turmoil.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I disagree with your terminology. A lot of turmoil in the Democratic Party. There isn’t a lot of turmoil.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s coming up next week on The Speaker. The Speaker is a production of KQED in San Francisco and distributed by NPR. It’s hosted and reported by me, Scott Shafer. It’s reported and produced by Ariella Markowitz. It’s edited by Padmini Raghunath. Final mix and sound designed by Christopher Beale. Fact checking by Mark Betancourt. Additional editing from Anna Sussman and Jen Chien, KQED’s director of podcasts. Original theme song composed by Cedric Wilson. Additional music from APM. Maha Sanad is KQED’s podcast engagement producer. Ethan Toven-Lindsey is KQED’s editor-in-chief. Special thanks to our partners from the Oral History Center at the University of California, Berkeley. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television, and radio artists, San Francisco, Northern California local.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s coming up next week on The Speaker. The Speaker is a production of KQED in San Francisco and distributed by NPR. It’s hosted and reported by me, Scott Shafer. It’s reported and produced by Ariella Markowitz. It’s edited by Padmini Raghunath. Final mix and sound designed by Christopher Beale. Fact checking by Mark Betancourt. Additional editing from Anna Sussman and Jen Chien, KQED’s director of podcasts. Original theme song composed by Cedric Wilson. Additional music from APM. Maha Sanad is KQED’s podcast engagement producer. Ethan Toven-Lindsey is KQED’s editor-in-chief. Special thanks to our partners from the Oral History Center at the University of California, Berkeley. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television, and radio artists, San Francisco, Northern California local.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "After President Trump takes power in 2016, Pelosi’s legacy is tested",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791354667,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 156,
"wordCount": 7892
},
"headData": {
"title": "The Shadow | KQED",
"description": "After President Trump takes power in 2016, Pelosi’s legacy is tested",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "The Shadow",
"datePublished": "2026-10-07T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-06T23:31:07-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 33520,
"slug": "podcast",
"name": "Podcast"
},
"audioUrl": "https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/prfx.byspotify.com/e/dovetail.prxu.org/18508/84e2dccf-6cb6-4488-9e74-3e8d3ab41388/The_Speaker_Episode_4_Session_CJB_v09_FINAL.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12103278/the-shadow",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"#Transcript\">View Full Episode Transcript\u003c/a>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In 2016,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Nancy Pelosi was planning on retiring from Congress. But Donald Trump’s presidential victory disrupted her plans, and her legacy. Pelosi’s public battles with the President cemented her status as a liberal warrior – spearheading two impeachments and navigating the January 6th attack. But to some in her caucus, including the young progressives of “The Squad,” Pelosi’s approach wasn’t enough to address a new wave of populism and a growing mistrust of government. And amidst this politically fraught landscape, did Pelosi’s actions around stock trading — or inaction, according to some — add fuel to the fire?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"Transcript\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This is a computer-generated transcript. While our team has reviewed it, there may be errors.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Last episode, we focused on the Affordable Care Act, which then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi pushed through Congress. But when you ask people about Pelosi, like our producer Ariella Markowitz did on the streets in DC, something else tends to come up. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ariella Markowitz: \u003c/strong>What comes to mind when you think of Nancy Pelosi?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Vox 1: \u003c/strong>Man, California, stocks, stock trades, that’s funny. Insider stock trading. He defends that, he’s gotten quite wealthy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Vox 2:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>She has manipulated her position and used it to her benefit.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>It’s something her opponents bring up a lot. Here’s President Trump earlier this year during his State of the Union address. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>Let’s also ensure that members of Congress cannot corruptly profit from using insider information. They stood up for that, I can’t believe it. Did Nancy Pelosi stand up if she’s here? Doubt it. Pass the Stop Insider Trading Act without delay. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A few months later, the House passed a stock trading ban for members of Congress, and Nancy Pelosi voted against it. Some Democrats had an issue with the bill because it included an unrelated voter ID provision, which many critics say is really a way of suppressing Democratic turnout in elections. And the stock trading bill? It wouldn’t have applied if it were the president. Profiteering by President Trump and his family, including prolific stock trading, are a trademark of his second term. But to many, the name Pelosi triggers allegations of corruption. In her second run as Speaker, Pelosi and President Trump became full-on enemies, locked in public brawls that would define both of their legacies. But Pelosi doesn’t really want to go there.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I don’t spend a whole lot of time talking about Trump, so…\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I know he’s not your favorite.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, it’s not my favorite compared to almost any creature crawling the earth. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Still, this creature has defined her final chapter in unexpected ways. From KQED, this is The Speaker. I’m Scott Shafer. Today, how Pelosi responds to what she and many see as a fundamental threat to democracy. President Trump. And with faith in the Democratic Party and public trust in U.S. Institutions at their lowest in decades, the shadow that hangs over her legacy. Accusations of insider stock trading in Congress. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi says she planned on retiring after the 2016 election. She would have been 76 years old, and she was assuming that a Democrat would win. You were really ready to say, that’s it, I’m done.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Well, I was ready to say it a number of times, but I only thought I would go 10 years. I never thought I’d run for Congress, much less for leadership. And then the members, you have to stay, you have stay, you to stay. And so I did.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She thought her crowning achievement, the Affordable Care Act, her baby, would be protected under a President Hillary Clinton. On November 8, 2016, Pelosi was in Washington with her colleagues, waiting for the returns to come in.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>One of my colleagues was the chairman of the party in Philadelphia. And we were getting returns from him saying, they told us if we got over 500,000 in Philadelphia, we would carry Pennsylvania. So one night he’d say, it’s getting closer, but we’re okay, it was getting closer. Then finally he said, you know, the turnout from McCall, but you know just naming the names of some counties is just unprecedented. We’re not gonna be able to offset it. I was like getting kicked in the back by a mule.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>During his first campaign for president, Trump had leaned into people’s cynicism and mistrust of politicians.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>If we win on November 8th, we are going to drain the swamp in Washington, D.C. We’re draining the swamp.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>After he won, President Trump issued a flurry of executive orders and policies. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>President Trump’s most recent executive order effectively banned citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. For at least 90 days. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>Today President Donald Trump is continuing to defend his administration’s policy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>When you prosecute the parents for coming in illegally, which should happen, you have to take the children away. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>And, in 2017, when white supremacists rallied in Charlottesville, Virginia? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>There are people, bodies laying on the ground right now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>NAZIS GO HOME! \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In response to the violence, Trump said this.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>Very fine people on both sides \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the midst of all this, Pelosi and Democrats campaigned hard to defeat Republicans in the 2018 midterms. But economic unrest was starting to influence the Democratic Party’s politics. For years there had been discontent on the left about the 2008 bailout and economic disparity. A movement called Occupy Wall Street kicked off in 2011. The slogan was, we are the 99 percent. In 2016, Senator Bernie Sanders had been a grassroots presidential candidate, and he was popular. More than 40 percent of people who voted in the primaries wanted him to be the nominee.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bernie Sanders: \u003c/strong>The reason that we have done so well, the reason I believe we’re going to do so well in the Hampshire and in the other states that follow, the reason is the American people are saying no to a rigged economy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Sanders had run on a message about economic inequality.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Bernie Sanders: \u003c/strong>They no longer want to see an economy in which the average American works longer hours for low wages while almost all new income and wealth is going to the top 1%.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Some people argue that this energy helped Democrats take back the House in 2018, two years into Trump’s presidency. They’d been out of power since the Tea Party had stormed into Congress almost a decade earlier. That election night, Pelosi took the stage again to the chants of \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Thank you all, thank you all very much, remember this feeling, know the power to win. Today is more than about Democrats and Republicans, it’s about restoring the Constitution’s checks and balances to the Trump administration.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>And with that election, a wave of newcomers with bold ideas, including four progressive women who became known as the Squad. Ayanna Pressley from Massachusetts, Rashida Tlaib from Michigan, Ilhan Omar from Minnesota, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, AOC, from New York. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>I think what we’ve seen is that working-class Americans want a clear champion and there is nothing radical about moral clarity in 2018.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>AOC is a democratic socialist, like Bernie Sanders. She defeated Joe Crowley, one of Pelosi’s top deputies in leadership. Many had actually seen Crowley as the person best positioned to become speaker after Pelosi left. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>He didn’t pay enough attention to his district. That, you know, that’s really what it is. It was an election in the summer. So I had very low turnout. I mean, he was predicating his success on how things go in a full election. But AOC ran a great campaign and it was stunning because he’s terrific and respected and he was chair of the caucus, I think, at the time. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Needless to say, there was some friction between the new members and the old guard. Before being sworn in, AOC joined a climate protest outside Pelosi’s office. People are holding yellow signs that say Green Jobs for All.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>I just want to let you all know how proud I am of each and every single one of you for putting yourselves and your bodies and everything on the line to make sure that we save our planet, our generation, and our home.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi told me she was the wrong target for their protest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>They should not have been in my office as a start because we had done more on climate than anybody.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Once they won back the House, some new, younger members were among those questioning whether Pelosi was the right leader for the House Democrats. But after cutting some deals, Pelosi was easily elected speaker for a second time. The squad cast their votes for her, too. Her swearing in was joyous.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I’d like to call my grandchildren up to be here when I take you, and any other children who want to join them. Come on, kids. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She’d have her work cut out for her. In June of 2019, the House was considering an appropriations bill that would provide funds to process and detain migrants at the border, but also for an emergency food and shelter program, money to help deal with what people were calling a humanitarian crisis. This bill was being debated a year after the Trump administration rolled out and then backed down on a policy that criminally prosecuted all adults crossing the border without papers. The Zero Tolerance Policy meant children were separated from their parents. It was something AOC spoke about at an oversight committee hearing in July 2019. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: \u003c/strong>And what was worse about this, Mr. Chairman, was the fact that there were American flags hanging all over these facilities, that children being separated from their parents in front of an American flag.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Progressives didn’t want to give more money to the agencies that carried out Trump’s harsh border policies. Pelosi and other Democratic leaders negotiated with them, added additional health and safety standards for migrant children to the bill, but the squad still defected. They were the only Democrats to vote no on the House bill. You described the squad as just four votes. It was. That’s what it was. It was four votes This may sound harsh, but it’s how Pelosi sees things. They were a small obstacle that didn’t affect her vote count. But Pelosi would be challenged again by the progressive wing when she had to give up the House bill with stronger protections for a Senate version. She was disappointed that Senate Democrats hadn’t fought for a better bill, but she decided to compromise and push it through. That caused public outrage from House progressives. AOC took her issues with Pelosi public. She said in an interview with the Washington Post… That she felt the squad had been singled out by Pelosi, implied it was because they were four women of color. AOC’s chief of staff compared centrist Democrats to segregationists on Twitter. He asked why this so-called legislative mastermind, referring to Pelosi, couldn’t get more done on kitchen table issues. By some accounts, Pelosi was furious. Even today, you can hear the annoyance in her voice.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>If you want to legislate, don’t be on airwaves criticizing the people whose votes you need. You can be here as a legislator where you need the votes of people for an issue that you may want to advance, or you can be an internet where you’re here to criticize your colleagues and expect them to vote for your bill.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In one closed-door meeting with her Democratic caucus, she told them to bring their grievances to her, not tweet about them to the public. She said at the end of the day, her goal was to help the children. She told them, some of you are here to make a beautiful pate, but we’re making sausage most of the time. Our producer Ariella asked Representative Ilhan Omar, part of the squad, about this.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ariella Markowitz: \u003c/strong>She was giving speeches about sausages versus pates and all of this. What do you think about that got under her skin? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ilhan Omar: \u003c/strong>I think she herself saw herself as a progressive and in some ways might’ve felt insulted that the progressive movement didn’t think of her as being one of them. And she felt like because she was the speaker and she’s the leader for the whole caucus and the whole House, that the decisions that she had to make had to be for the good of the whole.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now as I thought about these showdowns between the squad and the speaker, I remember how Pelosi herself had sort of ignored Congressional norms when she got to Washington. So I asked her how she felt about AOC. I wonder if you saw a little bit of yourself in her.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t at all.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I don’t know. Well, wait until you hear the question. Well, you just asked it, and I said no. I mean, whatBrase I’m thinking of is when you first got there in your very first speech, you talked about AIDS. You were kind of breaking the protocol a little bit. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>She’s operational, make no mistake, some of those squads are not. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Say what you mean by that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Operational is that she knows that she wants to accomplish something. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Operational. This is one of Pelosi’s favorite words. It’s what Congresswoman Sala Burton said about Pelosi before she endorsed her back in 1987. So when Pelosi called AOC operational, this was a mark of respect. She’s learned how to get things done. Here’s the thing, Pelosi comes from progressive San Francisco. She thinks of herself as a liberal, cares about things like ending poverty, providing health care, and believes the government should be a force for good. But she values something else, too, maybe even more than anything else, being effective. It means working within a system she ultimately believes in to get things done, being willing to compromise in the process. But in this era of President Trump… Was being operational enough? Even though she loathed President Trump, Pelosi tried to enter their first meeting with an open mind. Out of respect for the institution.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>This is historic. It’s a meeting between the new president and the leadership of the Congress, bipartisan leadership in the Congress. I’ve been in that meeting many times with President Bush, Obama. It’s historic. And so I’m sitting there thinking, why don’t we begin? Will he quote the Bible? Will he talk about America and founders and what America means to us? And we talk about his family and what this… Means to him, how will he begin this meeting? He leans over on the desk like this, the table, and says, you know, I won the popular vote. It was totally offensive. So I thought, well, that’s not true. That’s not truth. And he said, well I’m not even counting California.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The relationship went downhill from there. You may remember some of those moments, like in 2018 when Pelosi walked out of a meeting with Trump in a red coat and Armani sunglasses looking completely relaxed. She put her sunglasses on right in time for the photos. The image went viral.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>The new power suit for women, red coats, sunglasses, nerves of steel. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I had no idea, I just put on my coat and walked out to the press, which is outside. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Or you may remember her dressed in all white, standing behind the president. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>But Nancy Pelosi became the queen of condescending applause. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Clapping sarcastically at Trump during his 2019 State of the Union address. She clearly wasn’t intimidated by him. After all, this is the same woman who called Bush incompetent on national TV and refused to apologize for it. To me, it seems like Pelosi was adapting to the moment. She was smart enough to sense that in this era of politics, it’s those viral images that stick with people, not the closed-door legislative rooms Pelosi was used cutting deals in. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>The fact is, people want to see moments. You know, I hear speeches, they want to see moments, what people are happy about is that I did that, that I pointed to him, that I walked out of the office, because it spoke to their, how they felt or believed at the time. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>She was getting under his skin. To those in the Trump 1.0 administration, Pelosi was an obstructionist. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mick Mulvaney: \u003c/strong>Nancy was just so difficult to work with. Again, she may take that as a badge of honor, and I get it, there’s a lot of Republicans who take their unwillingness to compromise with Democrats as a badge of honor. So she’s not unique in that, but she had zero interest in doing anything with Donald Trump.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s Mick Mulvaney, who was President Trump’s chief of staff when Pelosi regained the speakership. We talked to him last episode, a Tea Party guy who campaigned for his House seat against the Affordable Care Act and won. He said President Trump respected Pelosi at first.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Mick Mulvaney: \u003c/strong>He respects strength and that’s certainly what she has. When she was doing what she was doing, she had a margin roughly the same size that Mike Johnson has today in the House. And she was able to corral her party and he respected that. But at the end of the day, she had zero interest in being with the guy and I think the country is worse for it. If they had wanted to sit down and cut some deals, they could have had a tremendous bipartisan deal on infrastructure. I even think they could’ve had a tremendous bipartisan on immigration. But it was fight, fight, fighting the whole time. And it was bitter and poisonous.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>While Republicans felt Pelosi was just an obstacle to getting anything done, many Democrats were calling for Trump’s impeachment. But Pelosi was wary.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>People wanted to impeach him just because he was obnoxious and dyed his hair orange. Everybody had a thing of he’s not really presidential. That’s not a cause for impeachment. You know what I’m saying?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But then, in the summer of 2019, President Trump gave Democrats their opportunity.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I’ve said the only person who’s responsible for the impeachment of Donald Trump, not once but twice, is Donald Trump. He gave us no choice.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A whistleblower said that in a phone call, Trump tried to get Ukrainian President Zelensky to investigate Trump’s rival in the upcoming election, Joe Biden, and his son Hunter. The White House released a transcript of the call, and President Trump tried to deflect to the debunked claim that Joe Biden was linked to a corruption scandal. And let me tell you something, Biden’s son is corrupt, and Biden is corrupt. To Pelosi, this attempt to interfere with the 2020 election was the unconstitutional violation Democrats could not ignore. This would be the grounds for the impeachment case.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>What he did was wrong. Now, different other things you could have included in that we said, you have to keep it simple. What is the thing that crosses the line, not just on its own might be grounds for impeachment, but not on the caliber of the Zelensky letter. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But Pelosi didn’t revel in the impeachment, she actually silenced the applause after the impeachment vote with a stern glance and a hand gesture.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Article 1 is adopted. The question is on adoption of Article 2.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>You can count votes. You were probably, I’m guessing, pretty confident the Senate would not convict, right? They needed 67 votes. Why did you think it was important to go ahead and really start a process that you knew ultimately you would not?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We did succeed. We impeached him twice. But you think that we should be guided by what the Senate might do? You think that, we would say, well, the president has committed impregnable offenses of highest magnitude, and we shouldn’t do that because we don’t know what some senators are going to do? No. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>I am thrilled to report to you tonight that our economy is the best it has ever been. Our military is completely rebuilt, with its power being unmatched anywhere in the world, and it’s not even close. It was February\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The day before the Senate voted to acquit Trump of both impeachment charges. President Trump was giving his State of the Union speech, and Pelosi went a step further than she’d ever gone before. She was sitting behind Trump, in her house. He’d chosen that night to honor right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh, who held notoriously homophobic views. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Donald Trump: \u003c/strong>And Rush, in recognition of all that you have done for our nation, the millions of people a day that you speak to and that you inspire, I am proud to announce tonight that you will be receiving our country’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi sat there, lips pursed, looking down at the printed speech, looking away from the balcony where Limbaugh was, and toward her caucus in the audience. As Trump finished his speech, saying the best was yet to come, she stood up, not clapping, but ripping up the president’s printed remarks two or three pages at a time, biting her lip. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I didn’t intend to do that. It just was a manifesto of lies. And I wasn’t just gonna let that stand. I just wasn’t gonna let it stand. As courteous as we are to a guest in our house, when he abuses that courtesy, when he lies there the whole time, gives a medal of freedom to an anti-gay, blah, blah, and our house. Do that at the White House. We don’t agree with your choice, but that’s your choice. You’re the president, but don’t come here and sully the House of Representatives chamber. With your obnoxious behavior. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>Pelosi, at her heart, believes in institutions. She respects the separation of powers, the three branches of government, and the staying power of those institutions. But to me, it seemed like at that moment something changed for her, not even standing with polite, respectful applause for the president as she did behind President George W. Bush for both of his State of the Union addresses when she was speaker, instead A stunning act of defiance on primetime television. Nine months later, Joe Biden won the presidential election. Trump was out. On January 6, 2021, Pelosi, along with Vice President Mike Pence, were overseeing the certification of the election. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We didn’t anticipate violence. We didn’t expect the President of the United States to incite an insurrection.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>We’re starting to get surrounded. They’re taking the north-west scaffolding. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Protesters attack the west side of the Capitol, where presidential inauguration ceremonies are held. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Security came to me and they said we’re taking you out I said I can handle this guy you know we’re ready \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>We are walking over now to the tunnel\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We could see on TV, because when you’re in the chamber, you can’t see. You see on tv what was happening, that they were coming to the Capitol. It’s really hard to explain. This is the citadel of democracy to the world. And these people are coming in, breaking windows, and they go in, and we’re seeing them go into the Capitol with Dixie flags, you know, Confederate flags, under the dome that Lincoln built when he was president. He built it during the Civil War. People said to him, use the steel for the war and the personnel for the War. He said. No, we have to show the world that we are resilient. So they continue with the dome. Under Lincoln’s dome, Confederate flags. One guy with a shirt, six million Jews were not enough. Auschwitz. That’s. What this was, assaulting police, all the rest of that, defecating on the floor. I say this because this brute who was president now wants to give them money for killing or endangering the lives of police officers. They were gonna get a bullet in my effing brain. They use the F word a lot about me throughout the whole thing. They were going to hang the vice president. Gallows for him.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>No doubt, many in the mob hated Pelosi. They came looking for her. They broke into her speaker’s office. A man put his feet up on her desk. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jan 6 Archival: \u003c/strong>Where are you Nancy? We’re looking for you! She’s in jail!\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Have you ever, you know, given yourself the permission to think about what would have happened if they had found you?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Well, here’s the thing that I thought. I wasn’t really thinking so much about my personal safety. I was thinking about my grandson who was with me. His mother, Alexandra, took the boys to see an historic event, the transfer of power.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But something fundamental had broken.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>And this vile creature, the vilest creature to ever crawl the face of the earth. And they said, well, what about Hitler? I said, he wasn’t president of the United States. Insights are an insurrection, sits in his office, and then won’t let the police, the National Guard come and then lies about it the whole time. I called the governor of Virginia. They said they had their troops ready. These people are so idiotic, but let’s put that over all of them. The secretary of the army who had the jurisdiction to. So I have to talk to my boss. That’s the secretary of defense. Haven’t you done that yet? Well, this is hard. It’s complicated. It takes time. I said, they have been attacking the Capitol. Well, I have to go ask my boss and well, you have to have authority at the location. I said there, look, authority is there. You need to be able to send the national guard. But they may, they avoided everything about it because their boss. The Commander-in-Chief, who can say over any of that, was just holding them back. And even some of the Republicans were asking the President to call off those guys, and he still wouldn’t do it. This is, I want to tell you something, this is a demonic figure, this guy who is unfortunately in the White House.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>I know you’re very religious. Did you pray?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Of course we prayed, prayed for our country. We prayed for those who were under assault.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>A few hours after the attack, authorities confirmed the Capitol had been secured. Congress was going to continue certifying the election results\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I said, you know what, we’re going to the floor. That’s where this assault occurred, that’s where we’re going back to show the world.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the early hours of the morning on January 7th, 2021, the election was certified. In his final days in office, Nancy Pelosi would lead another impeachment against President Trump for inciting the insurrection. The FBI investigated the rioters. There were prosecutions. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival News: \u003c/strong>The Arkansas man who was photographed on January 6th with his feet up on Nancy Pelosi’s desk was sentenced yesterday. He got four and a half years in prison. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Biden became president. Working together in the midst of the COVID pandemic, he and Pelosi muscled some big bills through a divided Congress. The Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS and Science Act. But during her last years as speaker, Pelosi made headlines for another reason. In 2021, at a press conference, a reporter from Business Insider asked Pelosi a question.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Business Insider Reporter: \u003c/strong>Should members of Congress and their spouses be banned from trading individual stocks while serving in Congress? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I don’t know to this second one, we have a responsibility to report in the stock, on the stock but I’m not familiar with that five month review but if people aren’t reporting they should be. Because this is a free market and people, we have a free-market economy, they should be able to participate in that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Pelosi was firm in her response. No ban on stock trading. At that moment, she didn’t see the backlash, but it had been coming for years. Back in 2011, Pelosi had just gotten the Affordable Care Act across the finish line. She lost the speakership, but was still leader of House Democrats. Then, the CBS News magazine 60 Minutes published a bombshell investigation.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Peter Schweizer: \u003c/strong>There are all sorts of forms of honest grafts that congressmen engage in that allow them to become very, very wealthy. So it’s not illegal, but I think it’s highly unethical. I think it’s highly offensive and wrong.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s Peter Schweizer, the main source in the story. At the time, Schweizer was a fellow at the Hoover Institute, a conservative think tank. He’d been criticized as early as 1993 for fabricating sources and events in his book, Friendly Spies. He’d go on to publish Clinton Cash in 2015, a book that Media Matters concluded contained over 20 errors, fabrications, and distortions. On 60 Minutes, Schweiser claimed that members of Congress… Have been trading stocks based on inside information.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Peter Schweizer: \u003c/strong>We know that during the health care debate, people were trading health care stocks. We know during the financial crisis of 2008, they were getting out of the market before the rest of America really knew what was going on.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>The 60 Minutes story didn’t exclusively focus on Pelosi. They called out other lawmakers, too, including Republican Speaker John Boehner. But the report looked at an incident from 2008. Pelosi’s husband, Paul, had bought shares of stock from Visa, the credit card company. The report called into question whether the family’s investment influenced Pelosi’s decision-making around regulations to protect credit card consumers. To investigate this, the 60 Minutes correspondent, Steve Croft, went to a press conference and asked Pelosi about it.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft: \u003c/strong>Madam Leader, I wanted to ask you why you and your husband back in March of 2008 accepted and participated in a very large IPO deal from Visa, at a time there was major legislation affecting the credit card companies making its way through the house, and did you consider that to be a conflict of interest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I don’t know what your point is of your question. Is there some point that you want to make with that? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>This response is classic Pelosi, full-throated denial.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>It’s not true, and that’s that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>I don’t understand what part’s not true.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Yes, sir, that I would act upon an investment\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>After the piece aired, Pelosi’s office put out a statement. It denied that her decisions about regulating credit card companies were swayed by her husband’s stock purchases. The statement said, quote, It is very troubling that 60 Minutes would base their reporting off of an already discredited conservative author who has made a career out of attacking Democrats. Peter Schweizer was a close ally of Steve Bannon, one of Trump’s top advisors. Schweizer would become editor of the far-right website Breitbart News. It’s true that Democrats had introduced a bill that would regulate credit card swipe fees in the House and that the bill died later that year. But Pelosi said it wasn’t because she was trying to help her husband’s portfolio. By the time the bill made it out of committee, Pelosi said, it was too late to bring the for a vote before the session ended. The Democratic congressman who introduced the bill, John Conyers from Michigan, said even if they’d somehow managed to pass it, President Bush would probably have vetoed it. So Pelosi said they waited until President Obama was in the White House to push card regulations through. In 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act included a cap on debit card swipe fees and other protections for credit card consumers. There are lots of moving parts here. It’s hard to say definitively what happened or why. But the accusations were very powerful. They touched a nerve. In 2012, public anger about the issue of stock trading in Congress was mounting. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Steve Kroft: \u003c/strong>Both the House and the\u003cem> \u003c/em>Senate in a rare display of bipartisanship overwhelmingly passed the Stock Act, which prohibits its members from trading on non-public information gathered during the course of their duties.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Congress passed the Stock Act, stopped trading on congressional knowledge. It’s been said sunlight is the best disinfectant, meaning transparency. The Stock Act required members of Congress to disclose their trades within 30 to 45 days of making them. But the issue didn’t go away. Actually, with the information available to the public, people became more aware of how much money Congress members were making on stock trading. There are even apps you can use to track and literally copy the same stock trades the Pelosi’s and other members of Congress do. When Pelosi came to Congress, she and her husband were already wealthy. Her husband is a finance guy. The family had at least $610,000 worth in stocks. In today’s money, that’s something like 1.8 million. The stock research platform, Quiver Quantitative, estimates that her family currently holds around $135 million in publicly traded assets. In 2021, Pelosi ranked in the top 25 richest people in Congress. Here’s Hillary Brossith, she’s executive director at OpenSecrets, a non-profit that tracks money and politics. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Hilary Braseth: \u003c/strong>We often find that some of the highest drivers of traffic to our site are citizens who are curious about the net worth of any given member of Congress. And Nancy Pelosi, I think in many ways, is one of the main profiles that we often see folks looking up, perhaps because she has quite high of a net worth.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now, owning stocks can benefit anyone, but the richer you are and the more stocks you own, the more you make when the market goes up. Having private briefings, like members of Congress do, can give them a leg up before the market reacts to news. Business Insider recently published an investigation that found that dozens of Congress members have violated federal conflict of interest laws. Pelosi wasn’t on that list, but many of her colleagues were accused of disclosing after the required disclosure window. And a few were accused of insider trading. It seems obvious that banning members of Congress from trading stocks wouldn’t just stop the practice from happening, but would also remove the appearance of a conflict, but Pelosi opposed it. When Pelosi first ran for her seat back in 1987, her opponents argued that Pelosi’s wealth would put her out of touch with working class people. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Carol Ruth Silver: \u003c/strong>How can she relate to people like me, a single parent, working mother, or somebody else? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Fast forward to 2020. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, Pelosi went on the James Corden show.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>James Corden: \u003c/strong>Welcome back, we’re here with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and we’ve asked her to share something from her home for late, late show and tell. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In the segment she showed her freezer full of ice cream.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Speaker Pelosi, what have you found? I don’t know what I would have done if ice cream were not invented.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>People were losing their jobs, terrified about the economy. Trump’s reelection campaign seized on an opportunity to punch back at Pelosi. They posted a video on YouTube called Let Them Eat Ice Cream, Nancy Antoinette, a reference to the infamous Queen of France. It featured the James Corden interview with some creative edits. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video: \u003c/strong>Speaker Pelosi, what are you gonna share with us from your home? Chocolate candy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video: \u003c/strong>Thousands have been forced to wait for hours at food banks all across the country. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Archival – Nancy Antoinette Video:\u003c/strong>Oh my chocolate and then we have some other chocolate \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>It was a partisan attack, but like her opposition to the congressional stock trading ban, the moment highlighted one of Pelosi’s weaknesses. She can be a little tone deaf to how her own behavior strikes others and how it stokes anger. When we started making this podcast, I knew I wanted to ask Pelosi about congressional stock trading, but I have to say I wasn’t looking forward to bringing it up. I know how she can sometimes go into attack mode when she’s asked about a topic she doesn’t like. She completely rejects accusations that she used knowledge gained as a member of Congress to make favorable stock transactions. She defended her stock trades to me as something everyone does.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>My point of view is if family has investments, stock, I’m not talking about big deal. Most people don’t even realize that their 401k is in the stock market. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But there are a lot of people who’ve come to Congress and left with a lot more money than they got there. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>If they’re doing something illegal, then they should be charged with that. They have investigated me personally, politically, economically, all the time. They have never come up with anything. They’ve spent a lot of money and a lot time. They can say I have cloven feet and horns in my head and I’m a devil and the rest of that, but they’ve never come with anything that I did anything wrong in Congress. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Josh Hawley was on Fox News saying that, you know, insider trading corruption should be prosecuted.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>Not me. Nobody’s ever accused me… \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Well, he was referring to you. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>In 2023, Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri introduced the Pelosi act preventing elected leaders from owning securities and investments. I tried asking Pelosi why she didn’t try and pass a ban when she was leader. So you don’t feel that not getting that passed is a negative part of your legacy.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I don’t at all, because the people who, the members didn’t, it’s up to the members to get something passed like that. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Yeah, although as leader, you have a lot of say in what the caucus wants to do. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t. All you need is a few people to say, we’re not doing this. And some of them were in the leadership. They just thought it was insulting to the members to say you don’t have any values and you don’t have any judgment. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>But now she says she does support a ban on stock trading for members of Congress. So I kept pushing her. What changed? You oppose that for many years and I’m wondering.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>No, I didn’t pose it for many years. I posed it when they suggested it, and then Kalkus said they won it and I supported it. It didn’t come forward because there weren’t the votes to bring it forward.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>At the top of the episode, I mentioned a stock trading ban passed Congress in July. But Pelosi didn’t vote for it, because she says it exempted the president.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi:\u003c/strong>\u003cem> \u003c/em>It was a terrible bill. And we wanted it to be more comprehensive, including the President of the United States, because they would never get that signed by the President of the United States. But if you look at that bill, it is totally incomplete. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Now, Pelosi doesn’t like to back down, especially when she feels like these are partisan attacks. But she also knows that appearances matter, and they can undercut trust in elected officials. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>We want to do whatever it takes, and that means even this issue, to restore the confidence people have in the system. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Hilary Braseth of Open Secrets again.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Hilary Braseth: \u003c/strong>Earlier this year, there was a survey that roughly 75% of the country thinks that there is too much money in politics and does not like it. And so this really presents a quandary that those who get elected into public office tend to benefit from the system as it’s designed and don’t have much incentive to change the system or to create tighter rules around how much money they can raise, whether or not they can trade stocks based on. Knowledge they might be privy to.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>Senate Democrats ended up blocking the stock trading ban. They promised future reform, but needless to say, any ban passed now wouldn’t take effect until Pelosi leaves office. It’s been over five years since the violent riot at the Capitol. A lot has changed since then. Back in 2018, to round up votes to regain the gavel, Pelosi agreed to a four-year limit on her second speakership. And in 2023, after Democrats lost the House, she stepped down from leadership. President Trump is back in power after defeating former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024. Republicans also maintain control of the House. And after he came back into office, President Trump pardoned those who’d been successfully prosecuted for their role in the January 6th attacks. The formal office of the Speaker of the House is historic and spacious, with vaulted ceilings and ornate wooden furniture, outer sitting areas full of comfortable couches and arm chairs. From a window you can see out across the National Mall. But that’s no longer Pelosi’s domain. Her party’s in the minority now, and her current office? It’s nice enough, but decidedly un-grand. It’s relatively cramped, packed with memorabilia. Colorful gavels, gifts from her constituents, chocolate for people who come to visit her, and sitting on a table, a pair of pink boxing gloves with her initials, NP, bedazzled in rhinestones, a gift from her friend Barbara Boxer. They were a little joke, boxing gloves from a boxer, but I think they really fit. No matter the cost, she goes down swinging. She’s not the speaker anymore, but she’s still Pelosi, calling shots behind the scenes, doing her best to shape the future of a Democratic party that’s up for grabs.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>We’re seeing a lot of turmoil in the Democratic Party in terms of candidates. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Nancy Pelosi: \u003c/strong>I disagree with your terminology. A lot of turmoil in the Democratic Party. There isn’t a lot of turmoil.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Scott Shafer: \u003c/strong>That’s coming up next week on The Speaker. The Speaker is a production of KQED in San Francisco and distributed by NPR. It’s hosted and reported by me, Scott Shafer. It’s reported and produced by Ariella Markowitz. It’s edited by Padmini Raghunath. Final mix and sound designed by Christopher Beale. Fact checking by Mark Betancourt. Additional editing from Anna Sussman and Jen Chien, KQED’s director of podcasts. Original theme song composed by Cedric Wilson. Additional music from APM. Maha Sanad is KQED’s podcast engagement producer. Ethan Toven-Lindsey is KQED’s editor-in-chief. Special thanks to our partners from the Oral History Center at the University of California, Berkeley. Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television, and radio artists, San Francisco, Northern California local.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12103278/the-shadow",
"authors": [
"255",
"11660",
"12031"
],
"programs": [
"news_37408"
],
"categories": [
"news_8",
"news_33520",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_37545",
"news_19442",
"news_20149",
"news_1323",
"news_36046",
"news_21116",
"news_37551",
"news_37548",
"news_37549",
"news_24474",
"news_177",
"news_17968",
"news_37547",
"news_37546",
"news_37550"
],
"featImg": "news_12103279",
"label": "news_37408"
},
"news_12102140": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12102140",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102140",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791367200000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-43-raises-voter-threshold-for-some-local-tax-measures",
"title": "Prop 43: Raises Voter Threshold for Some Local Tax Measures",
"publishDate": 1791367200,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 43: Raises Voter Threshold for Some Local Tax Measures | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] How much support do you think something should have to pass? 50% plus one? A simple majority? Or much more, like two-thirds in favor?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:11] Now in California, certain tax measures only require a simple majority of yes votes, while others require more.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:20] And that all depends on how the tax got on the ballot in the first place.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:26] If a special tax put on a ballot by citizens through signature gathering, it only needs a simple majority to pass. A special tax is a tax for a specific purpose, like policing, housing, or homeless services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:41] But Proposition 43 would raise that threshold and require more support for special tax measures, even if citizens put it on the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:52] I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:55] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:58] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. We’re back at it again with another prop breakdown to get you prepped to vote with confidence this November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:09] Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 43. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Prop 43 limits voters’ ability to raise revenues for local government services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:24] Here to break down Prop 43 for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Hey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Guy. Hey. Guy, let’s just dive in here. What is Prop 43 all about?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:35] Yeah, so Proposition 43 is all about raising the voter threshold for citizen initiatives to pass at the local level. So what does that mean? If there is a ballot measure placed on the ballot through citizens gathering signatures, this would require that measure to get two thirds support. So super majority support. If the tax measure is asking voters to raise taxes for a specific issue. And what this measure is in response to. Is what we’ve seen over the last decade where through a series of court decisions, it’s become easier to pass taxes on the local level if citizens through the signature process are bringing a tax proposal to the ballot instead of having elected officials place taxes on a ballot directly.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:21] And what’s the difference between a general tax and a special tax?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:25] So a general tax is a tax that could go fund anything. It goes into the city or county’s general fund and elected officials can decide how to spend it however they want. A special tax says this money, if the tax passes, has to go to this specific thing. So maybe it has to build new housing or maybe it had to go fund police and fire. But there’s a specific written description of what the tax would go to that really governs how it’s used. So again, special taxes, money that’s going towards a specific thing, if those are placed on the ballot by elected officials, they require a two thirds vote. And that is how it used to be for any special tax for a long time, until about 2017 when there was a court decision that said, actually, if voters gather signatures and put a special tax on the ballot, it only requires a majority vote. What Proposition 43 does is return it to how it used to be where any special tax that’s on the ballot locally will require a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:31] And why is there a difference there?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:34] Yeah, so this was really just a court interpretation of the law that had been on the books. Proposition 13, which is passed by California voters in the late 70s, said that these special taxes placed on the ballot by local government needed a two thirds vote to pass. And what the court questioned was whether the word government actually applied to the entire citizenry. So folks who are collecting signatures to put things on the They said, well, that doesn’t count as government putting it on the ballot. So that’s when you started to see the difference and you started see some real effects even here in the Bay Area. Look at Proposition C, for example, in San Francisco, 2018. This was a really high profile campaign around raising business taxes specifically to fund homelessness. Now, this was a special tax. The money that was collected had to go towards homelessness services, but it was put on the ballot through the signature process. And as a result, it was able to pass, even though the measure did not get two-thirds support, it got just over 60% support, but it able to take effect and bringing a lot of money to the city. For homelessness services. You even see it on the ballot in the Bay Area this year when voters are considering this region-wide transportation measure that’s only gonna require a majority vote to raise the sales tax to fund to fund BART, to fund Muni, Caltrain, because it was put on the ballet by a group of citizen signatures.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:06] That’s interesting. So whatever happens with Prop 43 has the potential to change how we vote on these kinds of measures you were just talking about.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:14] Exactly. Now it wouldn’t affect anything that’s on the ballot this year.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:18] Mm-hmm\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:19] But if Prop 43 passes, those could be kind of the last of their kind and going forward, we would end up in a situation where those kind of campaigns who are asking for tax increases for very specific purposes would need a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:39] I mean, obviously those are big issues and big measures facing us here in the Bay Area. I mean is this push for a super majority vote on tax measures like this a new idea?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:53] No, this is not a new idea. It’s actually something that has been pushed by anti-tax groups ever since those decisions following 2017. And these groups, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, most notably, have argued that the courts betrayed the purpose of Prop 13, that they went and created this kind of loophole that allowed these local tax increases with a majority vote when that was never meant to be the purpose, you know, behind this provision in Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:26] You mentioned earlier the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association coming out for this, I mean I feel like that’s a name that I just hear often, but I mean who are they exactly and how might California voters sort of make sense of who this association is and what else they’ve been responsible for?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:45] Yeah, so the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, probably the most notable group in support of Proposition 43, and that goes back to their name, Howard Jarves. He was the proponent of Prop 13, the measure that limited property taxes and other taxes in the late 70s.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover\u003c/strong>[00:07:02] A thunderous response for Howard Jarvis, the 75-year-old millionaire who’s been campaigning for 15 years against taxes. This time Jarvis has done it, succeeded with America’s first tax revolution since T was tipped into Boston Harbor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:18] And this is a group that ever since has been committed to reducing taxes in California, and they see Prop 43 as the next important step to do that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Howard Jarvis \u003c/strong>[00:07:28] We have proven that here in California that we, the people, not the politicians, are still the boss.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:38] So, you know, you have those anti-tax groups who have been pushing against this and now they hope to change it with Proposition 43.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:07:52] We’ll have more on Proposition 43 right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a KQED sustaining member. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:12] Well, let’s talk about the politics of this a little bit more. I mean, how did Prop 43 even get on the ballot in the first place? Who’s really behind it?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:24] The way this got on the ballot is kind of a long and winding road, but I’ll start at the end. This measure was placed on the ballot by the state legislature in a bill written by Democratic Assembly member Buffy Wicks from the East Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:08:41] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I rise to present ACA 22.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:44] Now the twist to this is that Buffy Wicks opposes this. She opposes the measure that she wrote to get this on the ballot. And the reason for that is that the measure she wrote was really a way to get anti-tax groups to remove a different proposal that they had already qualified for the ballot\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:09:04] Okay, what was the original measure that got taken off?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:08] You had anti-tax groups like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association team up with developers and real estate interests to qualify a measure for the ballot earlier this year. And that measure both would have made these changes to the two-thirds requirements for local taxes. They also would have limited real estate transfer taxes, which are a tax that’s assessed when a real estate sale is made. So when a building is sold, when a home is sold in many cases. Local cities and counties apply transfer taxes on really expensive real estate sales. And developers have said this has gotten out of hand and it’s actually hurting development in the state. So the measure that they qualified both would have made this change on local taxes. It also would have capped real estate transfer taxes and it would have gone back and retroactively eliminated many real estate transferred taxes. And Jon Coupal, who’s president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Talked about why his group thinks this is important in an interview on KQED’s political breakdown.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jon Coupal \u003c/strong>[00:10:12] We had a very expressed prohibition in the state constitution against real estate transfer taxes. And whenever the courts create a loophole, we have to come back and shut the door.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:24] Now this was seen by opponents as a really bad result for local governments, not only because it would have limited the ability to raise taxes going forward, but also cities rely on those transfer taxes. So there was an effort to try to negotiate and get this measure off the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:10:41] Politics is about choices and we often must navigate challenging decisions. Big picture, the vote today protects vital resources for our local communities and it removes the greatest threat to our cities and their fiscal health which is the Taxpayer Protection Act.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:56] So Buffy Wicks, in trying to craft this deal, basically wrote the measure that they committed to keeping on the ballot in exchange for getting the harsher limits on transfer taxes off of it. So she wrote it, it passed the legislature, it got placed on the ballet, and then she immediately made clear, I do not support this idea. This was just the only way I could get a proposal that I viewed as worse off of the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:24] Who else is coming out for prop 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:27] Yeah, so in addition to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, we also have broad support across the Republican landscape in California. The California Republican Party supports Proposition 43. A bunch of other anti-tax groups also have jumped on board. And so you have kind of seen a partisan split in support and opposition to 43.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:50] Who else is coming out against Prop 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:54] So we’ve seen the California Democratic Party oppose Proposition 43 and also a lot of groups with ties to local government, which is no surprise. They feel like Prop 43 is gonna make it harder to get the revenue needed to run local governments. So for example, the California State Association of Counties, which represents county governments across the state and SCIU California, which a union that represents a lot local government employees. Who potentially could stand to lose if it’s harder for governments to raise revenue in the future.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:12:24] Guy, what is spending looking like for Proposition 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:12:29] So we’re seeing spending in support on paper far more than spending in opposition. Over $14 million spent in support of this. I should just say though that a lot of that money was spent before this idea actually made it onto the ballot. So back when the measure looked a lot different and it had the provisions around transfer taxes, we haven’t seen, for example, big spenders on this like the California Business Roundtable who poured in more than $9 million in support of this earlier in the year. They haven’t continued to spend after this final measure was on the ballot. So it’s unclear whether that big spending gap is actually gonna persist in practice through November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:13:12] This one is this a little bit of a doozy. So I guess for voters, any advice as they just try and make sense of this particular ballot measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:13:23] Yeah, there’s definitely a lot of kind of twists and turns and complications into how this got onto the ballot. But I guess just to break down the arguments, supporters of prop 43 say if you want to tax residents for specific needs, there should be a broad support for that idea. It should be a two thirds support. If you’re going to raise taxes for a very earmarked cause, whether that be homelessness, public safety, whatever it is, it should be broad support behind it. And they want that two thirds requirement. On those local taxes. Opponents say this is not the time to make it harder for cities, for counties, for local governments to get revenue. A lot of cities and counties are already struggling with their budget. And by passing Proposition 43, it would be harder for citizens to bring tax measures on the ballot to bring more money into those local government coffers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Transcript",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] How much support do you think something should have to pass? 50% plus one? A simple majority? Or much more, like two-thirds in favor?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] How much support do you think something should have to pass? 50% plus one? A simple majority? Or much more, like two-thirds in favor?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:11] Now in California, certain tax measures only require a simple majority of yes votes, while others require more.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:11] Now in California, certain tax measures only require a simple majority of yes votes, while others require more.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:20] And that all depends on how the tax got on the ballot in the first place.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:20] And that all depends on how the tax got on the ballot in the first place.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:26] If a special tax put on a ballot by citizens through signature gathering, it only needs a simple majority to pass. A special tax is a tax for a specific purpose, like policing, housing, or homeless services.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:26] If a special tax put on a ballot by citizens through signature gathering, it only needs a simple majority to pass. A special tax is a tax for a specific purpose, like policing, housing, or homeless services.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:41] But Proposition 43 would raise that threshold and require more support for special tax measures, even if citizens put it on the ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:41] But Proposition 43 would raise that threshold and require more support for special tax measures, even if citizens put it on the ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:52] I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:52] I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:55] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:55] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:58] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. We’re back at it again with another prop breakdown to get you prepped to vote with confidence this November.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:58] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. We’re back at it again with another prop breakdown to get you prepped to vote with confidence this November.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:09] Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 43. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:09] Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 43. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Prop 43 limits voters’ ability to raise revenues for local government services.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Prop 43 limits voters’ ability to raise revenues for local government services.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:24] Here to break down Prop 43 for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:24] Here to break down Prop 43 for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Hey.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Hey.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Guy. Hey. Guy, let’s just dive in here. What is Prop 43 all about?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Guy. Hey. Guy, let’s just dive in here. What is Prop 43 all about?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:35] Yeah, so Proposition 43 is all about raising the voter threshold for citizen initiatives to pass at the local level. So what does that mean? If there is a ballot measure placed on the ballot through citizens gathering signatures, this would require that measure to get two thirds support. So super majority support. If the tax measure is asking voters to raise taxes for a specific issue. And what this measure is in response to. Is what we’ve seen over the last decade where through a series of court decisions, it’s become easier to pass taxes on the local level if citizens through the signature process are bringing a tax proposal to the ballot instead of having elected officials place taxes on a ballot directly.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:35] Yeah, so Proposition 43 is all about raising the voter threshold for citizen initiatives to pass at the local level. So what does that mean? If there is a ballot measure placed on the ballot through citizens gathering signatures, this would require that measure to get two thirds support. So super majority support. If the tax measure is asking voters to raise taxes for a specific issue. And what this measure is in response to. Is what we’ve seen over the last decade where through a series of court decisions, it’s become easier to pass taxes on the local level if citizens through the signature process are bringing a tax proposal to the ballot instead of having elected officials place taxes on a ballot directly.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:21] And what’s the difference between a general tax and a special tax?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:21] And what’s the difference between a general tax and a special tax?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:25] So a general tax is a tax that could go fund anything. It goes into the city or county’s general fund and elected officials can decide how to spend it however they want. A special tax says this money, if the tax passes, has to go to this specific thing. So maybe it has to build new housing or maybe it had to go fund police and fire. But there’s a specific written description of what the tax would go to that really governs how it’s used. So again, special taxes, money that’s going towards a specific thing, if those are placed on the ballot by elected officials, they require a two thirds vote. And that is how it used to be for any special tax for a long time, until about 2017 when there was a court decision that said, actually, if voters gather signatures and put a special tax on the ballot, it only requires a majority vote. What Proposition 43 does is return it to how it used to be where any special tax that’s on the ballot locally will require a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:25] So a general tax is a tax that could go fund anything. It goes into the city or county’s general fund and elected officials can decide how to spend it however they want. A special tax says this money, if the tax passes, has to go to this specific thing. So maybe it has to build new housing or maybe it had to go fund police and fire. But there’s a specific written description of what the tax would go to that really governs how it’s used. So again, special taxes, money that’s going towards a specific thing, if those are placed on the ballot by elected officials, they require a two thirds vote. And that is how it used to be for any special tax for a long time, until about 2017 when there was a court decision that said, actually, if voters gather signatures and put a special tax on the ballot, it only requires a majority vote. What Proposition 43 does is return it to how it used to be where any special tax that’s on the ballot locally will require a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:31] And why is there a difference there?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:31] And why is there a difference there?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:34] Yeah, so this was really just a court interpretation of the law that had been on the books. Proposition 13, which is passed by California voters in the late 70s, said that these special taxes placed on the ballot by local government needed a two thirds vote to pass. And what the court questioned was whether the word government actually applied to the entire citizenry. So folks who are collecting signatures to put things on the They said, well, that doesn’t count as government putting it on the ballot. So that’s when you started to see the difference and you started see some real effects even here in the Bay Area. Look at Proposition C, for example, in San Francisco, 2018. This was a really high profile campaign around raising business taxes specifically to fund homelessness. Now, this was a special tax. The money that was collected had to go towards homelessness services, but it was put on the ballot through the signature process. And as a result, it was able to pass, even though the measure did not get two-thirds support, it got just over 60% support, but it able to take effect and bringing a lot of money to the city. For homelessness services. You even see it on the ballot in the Bay Area this year when voters are considering this region-wide transportation measure that’s only gonna require a majority vote to raise the sales tax to fund to fund BART, to fund Muni, Caltrain, because it was put on the ballet by a group of citizen signatures.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:34] Yeah, so this was really just a court interpretation of the law that had been on the books. Proposition 13, which is passed by California voters in the late 70s, said that these special taxes placed on the ballot by local government needed a two thirds vote to pass. And what the court questioned was whether the word government actually applied to the entire citizenry. So folks who are collecting signatures to put things on the They said, well, that doesn’t count as government putting it on the ballot. So that’s when you started to see the difference and you started see some real effects even here in the Bay Area. Look at Proposition C, for example, in San Francisco, 2018. This was a really high profile campaign around raising business taxes specifically to fund homelessness. Now, this was a special tax. The money that was collected had to go towards homelessness services, but it was put on the ballot through the signature process. And as a result, it was able to pass, even though the measure did not get two-thirds support, it got just over 60% support, but it able to take effect and bringing a lot of money to the city. For homelessness services. You even see it on the ballot in the Bay Area this year when voters are considering this region-wide transportation measure that’s only gonna require a majority vote to raise the sales tax to fund to fund BART, to fund Muni, Caltrain, because it was put on the ballet by a group of citizen signatures.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:06] That’s interesting. So whatever happens with Prop 43 has the potential to change how we vote on these kinds of measures you were just talking about.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:06] That’s interesting. So whatever happens with Prop 43 has the potential to change how we vote on these kinds of measures you were just talking about.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:14] Exactly. Now it wouldn’t affect anything that’s on the ballot this year.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:14] Exactly. Now it wouldn’t affect anything that’s on the ballot this year.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:18] Mm-hmm\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:18] Mm-hmm\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:19] But if Prop 43 passes, those could be kind of the last of their kind and going forward, we would end up in a situation where those kind of campaigns who are asking for tax increases for very specific purposes would need a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:19] But if Prop 43 passes, those could be kind of the last of their kind and going forward, we would end up in a situation where those kind of campaigns who are asking for tax increases for very specific purposes would need a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:39] I mean, obviously those are big issues and big measures facing us here in the Bay Area. I mean is this push for a super majority vote on tax measures like this a new idea?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:39] I mean, obviously those are big issues and big measures facing us here in the Bay Area. I mean is this push for a super majority vote on tax measures like this a new idea?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:53] No, this is not a new idea. It’s actually something that has been pushed by anti-tax groups ever since those decisions following 2017. And these groups, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, most notably, have argued that the courts betrayed the purpose of Prop 13, that they went and created this kind of loophole that allowed these local tax increases with a majority vote when that was never meant to be the purpose, you know, behind this provision in Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:53] No, this is not a new idea. It’s actually something that has been pushed by anti-tax groups ever since those decisions following 2017. And these groups, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, most notably, have argued that the courts betrayed the purpose of Prop 13, that they went and created this kind of loophole that allowed these local tax increases with a majority vote when that was never meant to be the purpose, you know, behind this provision in Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:26] You mentioned earlier the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association coming out for this, I mean I feel like that’s a name that I just hear often, but I mean who are they exactly and how might California voters sort of make sense of who this association is and what else they’ve been responsible for?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:26] You mentioned earlier the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association coming out for this, I mean I feel like that’s a name that I just hear often, but I mean who are they exactly and how might California voters sort of make sense of who this association is and what else they’ve been responsible for?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:45] Yeah, so the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, probably the most notable group in support of Proposition 43, and that goes back to their name, Howard Jarves. He was the proponent of Prop 13, the measure that limited property taxes and other taxes in the late 70s.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:45] Yeah, so the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, probably the most notable group in support of Proposition 43, and that goes back to their name, Howard Jarves. He was the proponent of Prop 13, the measure that limited property taxes and other taxes in the late 70s.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover\u003c/strong>[00:07:02] A thunderous response for Howard Jarvis, the 75-year-old millionaire who’s been campaigning for 15 years against taxes. This time Jarvis has done it, succeeded with America’s first tax revolution since T was tipped into Boston Harbor.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover\u003c/strong>[00:07:02] A thunderous response for Howard Jarvis, the 75-year-old millionaire who’s been campaigning for 15 years against taxes. This time Jarvis has done it, succeeded with America’s first tax revolution since T was tipped into Boston Harbor.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:18] And this is a group that ever since has been committed to reducing taxes in California, and they see Prop 43 as the next important step to do that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:18] And this is a group that ever since has been committed to reducing taxes in California, and they see Prop 43 as the next important step to do that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Howard Jarvis \u003c/strong>[00:07:28] We have proven that here in California that we, the people, not the politicians, are still the boss.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Howard Jarvis \u003c/strong>[00:07:28] We have proven that here in California that we, the people, not the politicians, are still the boss.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:38] So, you know, you have those anti-tax groups who have been pushing against this and now they hope to change it with Proposition 43.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:38] So, you know, you have those anti-tax groups who have been pushing against this and now they hope to change it with Proposition 43.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:07:52] We’ll have more on Proposition 43 right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a KQED sustaining member. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:07:52] We’ll have more on Proposition 43 right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a KQED sustaining member. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:12] Well, let’s talk about the politics of this a little bit more. I mean, how did Prop 43 even get on the ballot in the first place? Who’s really behind it?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:12] Well, let’s talk about the politics of this a little bit more. I mean, how did Prop 43 even get on the ballot in the first place? Who’s really behind it?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:24] The way this got on the ballot is kind of a long and winding road, but I’ll start at the end. This measure was placed on the ballot by the state legislature in a bill written by Democratic Assembly member Buffy Wicks from the East Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:24] The way this got on the ballot is kind of a long and winding road, but I’ll start at the end. This measure was placed on the ballot by the state legislature in a bill written by Democratic Assembly member Buffy Wicks from the East Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:08:41] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I rise to present ACA 22.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:08:41] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I rise to present ACA 22.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:44] Now the twist to this is that Buffy Wicks opposes this. She opposes the measure that she wrote to get this on the ballot. And the reason for that is that the measure she wrote was really a way to get anti-tax groups to remove a different proposal that they had already qualified for the ballot\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:44] Now the twist to this is that Buffy Wicks opposes this. She opposes the measure that she wrote to get this on the ballot. And the reason for that is that the measure she wrote was really a way to get anti-tax groups to remove a different proposal that they had already qualified for the ballot\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:09:04] Okay, what was the original measure that got taken off?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:09:04] Okay, what was the original measure that got taken off?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:08] You had anti-tax groups like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association team up with developers and real estate interests to qualify a measure for the ballot earlier this year. And that measure both would have made these changes to the two-thirds requirements for local taxes. They also would have limited real estate transfer taxes, which are a tax that’s assessed when a real estate sale is made. So when a building is sold, when a home is sold in many cases. Local cities and counties apply transfer taxes on really expensive real estate sales. And developers have said this has gotten out of hand and it’s actually hurting development in the state. So the measure that they qualified both would have made this change on local taxes. It also would have capped real estate transfer taxes and it would have gone back and retroactively eliminated many real estate transferred taxes. And Jon Coupal, who’s president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Talked about why his group thinks this is important in an interview on KQED’s political breakdown.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:08] You had anti-tax groups like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association team up with developers and real estate interests to qualify a measure for the ballot earlier this year. And that measure both would have made these changes to the two-thirds requirements for local taxes. They also would have limited real estate transfer taxes, which are a tax that’s assessed when a real estate sale is made. So when a building is sold, when a home is sold in many cases. Local cities and counties apply transfer taxes on really expensive real estate sales. And developers have said this has gotten out of hand and it’s actually hurting development in the state. So the measure that they qualified both would have made this change on local taxes. It also would have capped real estate transfer taxes and it would have gone back and retroactively eliminated many real estate transferred taxes. And Jon Coupal, who’s president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Talked about why his group thinks this is important in an interview on KQED’s political breakdown.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jon Coupal \u003c/strong>[00:10:12] We had a very expressed prohibition in the state constitution against real estate transfer taxes. And whenever the courts create a loophole, we have to come back and shut the door.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jon Coupal \u003c/strong>[00:10:12] We had a very expressed prohibition in the state constitution against real estate transfer taxes. And whenever the courts create a loophole, we have to come back and shut the door.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:24] Now this was seen by opponents as a really bad result for local governments, not only because it would have limited the ability to raise taxes going forward, but also cities rely on those transfer taxes. So there was an effort to try to negotiate and get this measure off the ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:24] Now this was seen by opponents as a really bad result for local governments, not only because it would have limited the ability to raise taxes going forward, but also cities rely on those transfer taxes. So there was an effort to try to negotiate and get this measure off the ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:10:41] Politics is about choices and we often must navigate challenging decisions. Big picture, the vote today protects vital resources for our local communities and it removes the greatest threat to our cities and their fiscal health which is the Taxpayer Protection Act.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:10:41] Politics is about choices and we often must navigate challenging decisions. Big picture, the vote today protects vital resources for our local communities and it removes the greatest threat to our cities and their fiscal health which is the Taxpayer Protection Act.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:56] So Buffy Wicks, in trying to craft this deal, basically wrote the measure that they committed to keeping on the ballot in exchange for getting the harsher limits on transfer taxes off of it. So she wrote it, it passed the legislature, it got placed on the ballet, and then she immediately made clear, I do not support this idea. This was just the only way I could get a proposal that I viewed as worse off of the ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:56] So Buffy Wicks, in trying to craft this deal, basically wrote the measure that they committed to keeping on the ballot in exchange for getting the harsher limits on transfer taxes off of it. So she wrote it, it passed the legislature, it got placed on the ballet, and then she immediately made clear, I do not support this idea. This was just the only way I could get a proposal that I viewed as worse off of the ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:24] Who else is coming out for prop 43?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:24] Who else is coming out for prop 43?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:27] Yeah, so in addition to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, we also have broad support across the Republican landscape in California. The California Republican Party supports Proposition 43. A bunch of other anti-tax groups also have jumped on board. And so you have kind of seen a partisan split in support and opposition to 43.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:27] Yeah, so in addition to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, we also have broad support across the Republican landscape in California. The California Republican Party supports Proposition 43. A bunch of other anti-tax groups also have jumped on board. And so you have kind of seen a partisan split in support and opposition to 43.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:50] Who else is coming out against Prop 43?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:50] Who else is coming out against Prop 43?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:54] So we’ve seen the California Democratic Party oppose Proposition 43 and also a lot of groups with ties to local government, which is no surprise. They feel like Prop 43 is gonna make it harder to get the revenue needed to run local governments. So for example, the California State Association of Counties, which represents county governments across the state and SCIU California, which a union that represents a lot local government employees. Who potentially could stand to lose if it’s harder for governments to raise revenue in the future.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:54] So we’ve seen the California Democratic Party oppose Proposition 43 and also a lot of groups with ties to local government, which is no surprise. They feel like Prop 43 is gonna make it harder to get the revenue needed to run local governments. So for example, the California State Association of Counties, which represents county governments across the state and SCIU California, which a union that represents a lot local government employees. Who potentially could stand to lose if it’s harder for governments to raise revenue in the future.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:12:24] Guy, what is spending looking like for Proposition 43?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:12:24] Guy, what is spending looking like for Proposition 43?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:12:29] So we’re seeing spending in support on paper far more than spending in opposition. Over $14 million spent in support of this. I should just say though that a lot of that money was spent before this idea actually made it onto the ballot. So back when the measure looked a lot different and it had the provisions around transfer taxes, we haven’t seen, for example, big spenders on this like the California Business Roundtable who poured in more than $9 million in support of this earlier in the year. They haven’t continued to spend after this final measure was on the ballot. So it’s unclear whether that big spending gap is actually gonna persist in practice through November.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:12:29] So we’re seeing spending in support on paper far more than spending in opposition. Over $14 million spent in support of this. I should just say though that a lot of that money was spent before this idea actually made it onto the ballot. So back when the measure looked a lot different and it had the provisions around transfer taxes, we haven’t seen, for example, big spenders on this like the California Business Roundtable who poured in more than $9 million in support of this earlier in the year. They haven’t continued to spend after this final measure was on the ballot. So it’s unclear whether that big spending gap is actually gonna persist in practice through November.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:13:12] This one is this a little bit of a doozy. So I guess for voters, any advice as they just try and make sense of this particular ballot measure?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:13:12] This one is this a little bit of a doozy. So I guess for voters, any advice as they just try and make sense of this particular ballot measure?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:13:23] Yeah, there’s definitely a lot of kind of twists and turns and complications into how this got onto the ballot. But I guess just to break down the arguments, supporters of prop 43 say if you want to tax residents for specific needs, there should be a broad support for that idea. It should be a two thirds support. If you’re going to raise taxes for a very earmarked cause, whether that be homelessness, public safety, whatever it is, it should be broad support behind it. And they want that two thirds requirement. On those local taxes. Opponents say this is not the time to make it harder for cities, for counties, for local governments to get revenue. A lot of cities and counties are already struggling with their budget. And by passing Proposition 43, it would be harder for citizens to bring tax measures on the ballot to bring more money into those local government coffers.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:13:23] Yeah, there’s definitely a lot of kind of twists and turns and complications into how this got onto the ballot. But I guess just to break down the arguments, supporters of prop 43 say if you want to tax residents for specific needs, there should be a broad support for that idea. It should be a two thirds support. If you’re going to raise taxes for a very earmarked cause, whether that be homelessness, public safety, whatever it is, it should be broad support behind it. And they want that two thirds requirement. On those local taxes. Opponents say this is not the time to make it harder for cities, for counties, for local governments to get revenue. A lot of cities and counties are already struggling with their budget. And by passing Proposition 43, it would be harder for citizens to bring tax measures on the ballot to bring more money into those local government coffers.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "If passed, Prop 43 would make it harder for voters to approve citizen-led local tax measures.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790793060,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 50,
"wordCount": 2669
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 43: Raises Voter Threshold for Some Local Tax Measures | KQED",
"description": "If passed, Prop 43 would make it harder for voters to approve citizen-led local tax measures.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"socialDescription": "If passed, Prop 43 would make it harder for voters to approve citizen-led local tax measures.",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 43: Raises Voter Threshold for Some Local Tax Measures",
"datePublished": "2026-10-07T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-30T11:31:00-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 33520,
"slug": "podcast",
"name": "Podcast"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC5272960405.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12102140/prop-43-raises-voter-threshold-for-some-local-tax-measures",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:00] How much support do you think something should have to pass? 50% plus one? A simple majority? Or much more, like two-thirds in favor?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:11] Now in California, certain tax measures only require a simple majority of yes votes, while others require more.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:20] And that all depends on how the tax got on the ballot in the first place.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:26] If a special tax put on a ballot by citizens through signature gathering, it only needs a simple majority to pass. A special tax is a tax for a specific purpose, like policing, housing, or homeless services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:41] But Proposition 43 would raise that threshold and require more support for special tax measures, even if citizens put it on the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:52] I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:00:55] And I’m Ericka Cruz Guevarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price \u003c/strong>[00:00:58] Welcome to Prop Fest, a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious. We’re back at it again with another prop breakdown to get you prepped to vote with confidence this November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:09] Today, we’re walking you through Proposition 43. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover \u003c/strong>[00:01:14] Prop 43 limits voters’ ability to raise revenues for local government services.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:24] Here to break down Prop 43 for us is KQED’s politics and government correspondent, Guy Marzorati.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Hey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:01:30] Guy. Hey. Guy, let’s just dive in here. What is Prop 43 all about?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:01:35] Yeah, so Proposition 43 is all about raising the voter threshold for citizen initiatives to pass at the local level. So what does that mean? If there is a ballot measure placed on the ballot through citizens gathering signatures, this would require that measure to get two thirds support. So super majority support. If the tax measure is asking voters to raise taxes for a specific issue. And what this measure is in response to. Is what we’ve seen over the last decade where through a series of court decisions, it’s become easier to pass taxes on the local level if citizens through the signature process are bringing a tax proposal to the ballot instead of having elected officials place taxes on a ballot directly.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:02:21] And what’s the difference between a general tax and a special tax?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:02:25] So a general tax is a tax that could go fund anything. It goes into the city or county’s general fund and elected officials can decide how to spend it however they want. A special tax says this money, if the tax passes, has to go to this specific thing. So maybe it has to build new housing or maybe it had to go fund police and fire. But there’s a specific written description of what the tax would go to that really governs how it’s used. So again, special taxes, money that’s going towards a specific thing, if those are placed on the ballot by elected officials, they require a two thirds vote. And that is how it used to be for any special tax for a long time, until about 2017 when there was a court decision that said, actually, if voters gather signatures and put a special tax on the ballot, it only requires a majority vote. What Proposition 43 does is return it to how it used to be where any special tax that’s on the ballot locally will require a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:03:31] And why is there a difference there?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:03:34] Yeah, so this was really just a court interpretation of the law that had been on the books. Proposition 13, which is passed by California voters in the late 70s, said that these special taxes placed on the ballot by local government needed a two thirds vote to pass. And what the court questioned was whether the word government actually applied to the entire citizenry. So folks who are collecting signatures to put things on the They said, well, that doesn’t count as government putting it on the ballot. So that’s when you started to see the difference and you started see some real effects even here in the Bay Area. Look at Proposition C, for example, in San Francisco, 2018. This was a really high profile campaign around raising business taxes specifically to fund homelessness. Now, this was a special tax. The money that was collected had to go towards homelessness services, but it was put on the ballot through the signature process. And as a result, it was able to pass, even though the measure did not get two-thirds support, it got just over 60% support, but it able to take effect and bringing a lot of money to the city. For homelessness services. You even see it on the ballot in the Bay Area this year when voters are considering this region-wide transportation measure that’s only gonna require a majority vote to raise the sales tax to fund to fund BART, to fund Muni, Caltrain, because it was put on the ballet by a group of citizen signatures.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:06] That’s interesting. So whatever happens with Prop 43 has the potential to change how we vote on these kinds of measures you were just talking about.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:14] Exactly. Now it wouldn’t affect anything that’s on the ballot this year.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:18] Mm-hmm\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:19] But if Prop 43 passes, those could be kind of the last of their kind and going forward, we would end up in a situation where those kind of campaigns who are asking for tax increases for very specific purposes would need a two-thirds support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:05:39] I mean, obviously those are big issues and big measures facing us here in the Bay Area. I mean is this push for a super majority vote on tax measures like this a new idea?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:05:53] No, this is not a new idea. It’s actually something that has been pushed by anti-tax groups ever since those decisions following 2017. And these groups, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, most notably, have argued that the courts betrayed the purpose of Prop 13, that they went and created this kind of loophole that allowed these local tax increases with a majority vote when that was never meant to be the purpose, you know, behind this provision in Prop 13.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:06:26] You mentioned earlier the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association coming out for this, I mean I feel like that’s a name that I just hear often, but I mean who are they exactly and how might California voters sort of make sense of who this association is and what else they’ve been responsible for?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:06:45] Yeah, so the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, probably the most notable group in support of Proposition 43, and that goes back to their name, Howard Jarves. He was the proponent of Prop 13, the measure that limited property taxes and other taxes in the late 70s.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voiceover\u003c/strong>[00:07:02] A thunderous response for Howard Jarvis, the 75-year-old millionaire who’s been campaigning for 15 years against taxes. This time Jarvis has done it, succeeded with America’s first tax revolution since T was tipped into Boston Harbor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:18] And this is a group that ever since has been committed to reducing taxes in California, and they see Prop 43 as the next important step to do that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Howard Jarvis \u003c/strong>[00:07:28] We have proven that here in California that we, the people, not the politicians, are still the boss.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:07:38] So, you know, you have those anti-tax groups who have been pushing against this and now they hope to change it with Proposition 43.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:07:52] We’ll have more on Proposition 43 right after this break. By the way, if you appreciate the work we’re doing here on PropFest, consider becoming a KQED sustaining member. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. We’ll be right back.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:08:12] Well, let’s talk about the politics of this a little bit more. I mean, how did Prop 43 even get on the ballot in the first place? Who’s really behind it?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:24] The way this got on the ballot is kind of a long and winding road, but I’ll start at the end. This measure was placed on the ballot by the state legislature in a bill written by Democratic Assembly member Buffy Wicks from the East Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:08:41] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I rise to present ACA 22.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:08:44] Now the twist to this is that Buffy Wicks opposes this. She opposes the measure that she wrote to get this on the ballot. And the reason for that is that the measure she wrote was really a way to get anti-tax groups to remove a different proposal that they had already qualified for the ballot\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:09:04] Okay, what was the original measure that got taken off?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:09:08] You had anti-tax groups like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association team up with developers and real estate interests to qualify a measure for the ballot earlier this year. And that measure both would have made these changes to the two-thirds requirements for local taxes. They also would have limited real estate transfer taxes, which are a tax that’s assessed when a real estate sale is made. So when a building is sold, when a home is sold in many cases. Local cities and counties apply transfer taxes on really expensive real estate sales. And developers have said this has gotten out of hand and it’s actually hurting development in the state. So the measure that they qualified both would have made this change on local taxes. It also would have capped real estate transfer taxes and it would have gone back and retroactively eliminated many real estate transferred taxes. And Jon Coupal, who’s president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Talked about why his group thinks this is important in an interview on KQED’s political breakdown.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Jon Coupal \u003c/strong>[00:10:12] We had a very expressed prohibition in the state constitution against real estate transfer taxes. And whenever the courts create a loophole, we have to come back and shut the door.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:24] Now this was seen by opponents as a really bad result for local governments, not only because it would have limited the ability to raise taxes going forward, but also cities rely on those transfer taxes. So there was an effort to try to negotiate and get this measure off the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Buffy Wicks \u003c/strong>[00:10:41] Politics is about choices and we often must navigate challenging decisions. Big picture, the vote today protects vital resources for our local communities and it removes the greatest threat to our cities and their fiscal health which is the Taxpayer Protection Act.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:10:56] So Buffy Wicks, in trying to craft this deal, basically wrote the measure that they committed to keeping on the ballot in exchange for getting the harsher limits on transfer taxes off of it. So she wrote it, it passed the legislature, it got placed on the ballet, and then she immediately made clear, I do not support this idea. This was just the only way I could get a proposal that I viewed as worse off of the ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:24] Who else is coming out for prop 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:27] Yeah, so in addition to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, we also have broad support across the Republican landscape in California. The California Republican Party supports Proposition 43. A bunch of other anti-tax groups also have jumped on board. And so you have kind of seen a partisan split in support and opposition to 43.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:11:50] Who else is coming out against Prop 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:11:54] So we’ve seen the California Democratic Party oppose Proposition 43 and also a lot of groups with ties to local government, which is no surprise. They feel like Prop 43 is gonna make it harder to get the revenue needed to run local governments. So for example, the California State Association of Counties, which represents county governments across the state and SCIU California, which a union that represents a lot local government employees. Who potentially could stand to lose if it’s harder for governments to raise revenue in the future.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:12:24] Guy, what is spending looking like for Proposition 43?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:12:29] So we’re seeing spending in support on paper far more than spending in opposition. Over $14 million spent in support of this. I should just say though that a lot of that money was spent before this idea actually made it onto the ballot. So back when the measure looked a lot different and it had the provisions around transfer taxes, we haven’t seen, for example, big spenders on this like the California Business Roundtable who poured in more than $9 million in support of this earlier in the year. They haven’t continued to spend after this final measure was on the ballot. So it’s unclear whether that big spending gap is actually gonna persist in practice through November.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra \u003c/strong>[00:13:12] This one is this a little bit of a doozy. So I guess for voters, any advice as they just try and make sense of this particular ballot measure?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Guy Marzorati \u003c/strong>[00:13:23] Yeah, there’s definitely a lot of kind of twists and turns and complications into how this got onto the ballot. But I guess just to break down the arguments, supporters of prop 43 say if you want to tax residents for specific needs, there should be a broad support for that idea. It should be a two thirds support. If you’re going to raise taxes for a very earmarked cause, whether that be homelessness, public safety, whatever it is, it should be broad support behind it. And they want that two thirds requirement. On those local taxes. Opponents say this is not the time to make it harder for cities, for counties, for local governments to get revenue. A lot of cities and counties are already struggling with their budget. And by passing Proposition 43, it would be harder for citizens to bring tax measures on the ballot to bring more money into those local government coffers.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Some members of the KQED podcast team are represented by The Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco-Northern California Local.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12102140/prop-43-raises-voter-threshold-for-some-local-tax-measures",
"authors": [
"8654",
"227",
"11946",
"11649"
],
"programs": [
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_1758",
"news_8",
"news_33520",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_33812",
"news_28645",
"news_423",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12062350",
"label": "source_news_12102140"
},
"news_12103136": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12103136",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12103136",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791328461000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "why-opponents-of-prop-43-say-it-would-cripple-local-funding",
"title": "Why Opponents of Prop. 43 Say It Would Cripple Local Funding",
"publishDate": 1791328461,
"format": "audio",
"headTitle": "Why Opponents of Prop. 43 Say It Would Cripple Local Funding | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003cp>Proposition 43 on the November ballot would raise the requirement for increasing special taxes placed on the ballot by citizens. Right now it takes a simple majority to pass those taxes, but Prop. 43 would require a two-thirds vote. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The initiative is supported by business groups and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Meanwhile, unions and the California League of Cities say Prop. 43 would cripple their ability to raise critical revenue at a time when the federal government is slashing funding to state and local governments. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Scott and Marisa talk to the No on 43 campaign’s Bill Barnes, who is director of campaigns and community engagement for the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California. Marisa previously discussed the Yes campaign with \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12095893/prop-43-would-make-it-harder-to-raise-local-taxes-can-it-pass\">Jon Coupal\u003c/a>, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Don’t forget to use \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/voterguide\">KQED’s voter guide\u003c/a> when filling out your ballot!\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Plus, check out \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/newsletters/political-breakdown\">Political Breakdown’s weekly newsletter\u003c/a>, delivered straight to your inbox.\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Proposition 43 on the November ballot would raise the requirement for increasing special taxes placed on the ballot by citizens. Right now it takes a simple majority to pass those taxes, but Prop. 43 would require a two-thirds vote. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Proposition 43 on the November ballot would raise the requirement for increasing special taxes placed on the ballot by citizens. Right now it takes a simple majority to pass those taxes, but Prop. 43 would require a two-thirds vote. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The initiative is supported by business groups and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Meanwhile, unions and the California League of Cities say Prop. 43 would cripple their ability to raise critical revenue at a time when the federal government is slashing funding to state and local governments. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The initiative is supported by business groups and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Meanwhile, unions and the California League of Cities say Prop. 43 would cripple their ability to raise critical revenue at a time when the federal government is slashing funding to state and local governments. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Scott and Marisa talk to the No on 43 campaign’s Bill Barnes, who is director of campaigns and community engagement for the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California. Marisa previously discussed the Yes campaign with \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12095893/prop-43-would-make-it-harder-to-raise-local-taxes-can-it-pass\">Jon Coupal\u003c/a>, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Scott and Marisa talk to the No on 43 campaign’s Bill Barnes, who is director of campaigns and community engagement for the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California. Marisa previously discussed the Yes campaign with \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12095893/prop-43-would-make-it-harder-to-raise-local-taxes-can-it-pass\">Jon Coupal\u003c/a>, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Don’t forget to use \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/voterguide\">KQED’s voter guide\u003c/a> when filling out your ballot!\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Don’t forget to use \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/voterguide\">KQED’s voter guide\u003c/a> when filling out your ballot!\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Plus, check out \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/newsletters/political-breakdown\">Political Breakdown’s weekly newsletter\u003c/a>, delivered straight to your inbox.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Plus, check out \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/newsletters/political-breakdown\">Political Breakdown’s weekly newsletter\u003c/a>, delivered straight to your inbox.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Opponents of Proposition 43 warn that requiring a two-thirds vote for citizen-led special taxes would choke off local revenue as federal funding dries up. ",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791333166,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 5,
"wordCount": 164
},
"headData": {
"title": "Why Opponents of Prop. 43 Say It Would Cripple Local Funding | KQED",
"description": "Opponents of Proposition 43 warn that requiring a two-thirds vote for citizen-led special taxes would choke off local revenue as federal funding dries up. ",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Why Opponents of Prop. 43 Say It Would Cripple Local Funding",
"datePublished": "2026-10-06T16:14:21-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-06T17:32:46-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 13,
"slug": "politics",
"name": "Politics"
},
"source": "Political Breakdown",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC4847873250.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12103136",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12103136/why-opponents-of-prop-43-say-it-would-cripple-local-funding",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003cp>Proposition 43 on the November ballot would raise the requirement for increasing special taxes placed on the ballot by citizens. Right now it takes a simple majority to pass those taxes, but Prop. 43 would require a two-thirds vote. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The initiative is supported by business groups and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Meanwhile, unions and the California League of Cities say Prop. 43 would cripple their ability to raise critical revenue at a time when the federal government is slashing funding to state and local governments. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Scott and Marisa talk to the No on 43 campaign’s Bill Barnes, who is director of campaigns and community engagement for the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California. Marisa previously discussed the Yes campaign with \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12095893/prop-43-would-make-it-harder-to-raise-local-taxes-can-it-pass\">Jon Coupal\u003c/a>, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Don’t forget to use \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/voterguide\">KQED’s voter guide\u003c/a> when filling out your ballot!\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Plus, check out \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/newsletters/political-breakdown\">Political Breakdown’s weekly newsletter\u003c/a>, delivered straight to your inbox.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12103136/why-opponents-of-prop-43-say-it-would-cripple-local-funding",
"authors": [
"255",
"3239"
],
"programs": [
"news_33544"
],
"categories": [
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_37190",
"news_37541",
"news_22235",
"news_17968",
"news_37539",
"news_37540"
],
"featImg": "news_12095409",
"label": "source_news_12103136"
},
"news_12102938": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12102938",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102938",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791313233000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "golden-gate-fields-on-track-to-become-waterfront-park",
"title": "Golden Gate Fields on Track to Become Waterfront Park",
"publishDate": 1791313233,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Golden Gate Fields on Track to Become Waterfront Park | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\n\u003cp>East Bay officials took a goodbye tour on Monday of the shuttered Golden Gate Fields racetrack, which is slated to take the first step toward becoming a vast public open space for residents later this year. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In July, California agreed to foot the bulk of the $175 million bill for the nonprofit Trust for Public Land to purchase the 160-acre parcel at the border of Albany and Berkeley, with hopes to transform the Bay Area’s final horseracing track into a waterfront park. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The officials picture walking trails, sports fields and cafes replacing the iconic red and green grandstands and milelong oval track that drew horseracing fans — and college students looking for a cheap beer — for more than 80 years.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“This place is so intertwined with so many people’s memories, and it’s super exciting to be… protecting this place for generations to come to continue to play,” said Guillermo Rodriguez, the Trust for Public Land’s state director. “But play something different — bet on kids running and not necessarily horses going around a racetrack.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1999\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103025\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1999px) 100vw, 1999px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped wp-block-gallery-5 is-layout-flex wp-block-gallery-is-layout-flex\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" data-id=\"12103139\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103139\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" data-id=\"12103148\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103148\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In June of 2024, Golden Gate Fields held its final race, bringing an 83-year run and horse racing in the Bay Area, to an end. Rodriguez recalled that as a UC Berkeley student in the 1990s, attending the track’s Sunday “Dollar Days,” featuring $1 entry tickets, hot dogs and beers, was a “rite of passage.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“It’s where we filled up with all our carbs,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Across the bay, the racetrack at Tanforan in San Bruno shuttered more than 60 years ago. Bay Meadows in San Mateo closed in 2008 as interest in the sport waned and concerns grew about the safety of the horses at the tracks. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Animal rights activists estimated that \u003ca href=\"https://localnewsmatters.org/2024/06/07/golden-gate-fields-bows-out-storied-horse-track-goes-dark-after-final-race-this-sunday/\">thousands of horses died\u003c/a> at Golden Gate Fields during its operation. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Both other tracks have been replaced with massive developments — a sprawling shopping center where Tanforan once stood and mixed-use housing and commercial space at Bay Meadows.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Rodriguez said that while those uses make sense for their locations, when Golden Gate Fields shuttered, it was the public’s turn to get a new open space. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The Trust for Public Land announced earlier this year that it would purchase the property from the Canadian-owned Stronach Group, which still operates Santa Anita racetrack in Arcadia, and transfer it to the East Bay Regional Park District.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>While restoration and recreation will be at the forefront, what exactly will become of the parcel that once housed more than 1,000 horses and hundreds of workers in its “backstretch” hasn’t yet been decided. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Rodriguez said there will be a robust community engagement process with nearby cities, which already began in Albany last week. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Mayor Peggy McQuaid said between the 100 people who packed into the Albany Community Center in person and even more who joined the meeting virtually, there were “a lot of different ideas from the community” — from public access to revenue-generating development.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Everyone is excited about what’s really possible and exploring all the options,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The elected officials who toured the site on Monday expressed similar hopes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I’m really excited to have it go back to nature, to have this open shoreline, to have beautiful fields. There are a lot of folks interested in having sports fields,” Berkeley Mayor Adena Ishii said. “I have three dogs, so I’m very excited to be able to bring them here and walk.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>California State Senator Jesse Arreguín said he would love to see some sort of museum or educational site focused on the natural habitat and role of the waterfront, which was wetlands before the racetrack was built. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103029\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped wp-block-gallery-6 is-layout-flex wp-block-gallery-is-layout-flex\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" data-id=\"12103141\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103141\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" data-id=\"12103147\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103147\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Mayor of Albany Peggy McQuaid takes photos at Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>He also expressed support for some commercial use, especially since Golden Gate Fields generated more than $1 million in special revenue for the city of Albany, and about $700,000 for its school district.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I would see some level of development in terms of restaurants or cafes … that also I think add to the attractiveness of open space,” East Bay Assemblymember Buffy Wicks said. “That also gives more revenue-generating opportunities.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“There’s a lot that can be done with this, and I think the mayor of Albany said it best — It’s such an enormous space that we can have all of these things,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103143\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Assemblymember Buffy Wicks speaks at Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>Wicks said that when she first learned the track would close and land use would transition, she immediately asked whether it could be used for housing. While residential development isn’t entirely off the table, she said, it would come with “unique challenges.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Because of the land’s zoning, Albany voters would have to approve any residential development, according to Wicks. Adding the infrastructure needed to support housing on the land would also come with a significant cost.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“These are not insurmountable things, but they also just present a different kind of reality,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103031\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>There are also parameters to the funding that the Trust for Public Land will use to purchase the $175 million parcel. Nearly three-fourths will come from statewide funds for Proposition 4, a voter-approved bond for climate projects, including land conservation.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The park district has pledged $20 million for the project, and the nonprofit is raising the remaining $30 million through private donors and additional public funding.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The East Bay Regional Park District is expected to formally accept that it will take ownership of the property at a meeting on Oct. 20. The California Wildlife Conservation Board and California State Coastal Conservancy, two of the entities responsible for the state funds, will both hold votes on whether to approve the appropriations in November and December, respectively. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>After all three votes, Rodriguez said the Trust for Public Land has until Dec. 15 to exercise its option agreement to purchase the property.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We’re ending the preamble, and now the work begins,” McQuaid, the Albany mayor, said.\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>East Bay officials took a goodbye tour on Monday of the shuttered Golden Gate Fields racetrack, which is slated to take the first step toward becoming a vast public open space for residents later this year. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>East Bay officials took a goodbye tour on Monday of the shuttered Golden Gate Fields racetrack, which is slated to take the first step toward becoming a vast public open space for residents later this year. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In July, California agreed to foot the bulk of the $175 million bill for the nonprofit Trust for Public Land to purchase the 160-acre parcel at the border of Albany and Berkeley, with hopes to transform the Bay Area’s final horseracing track into a waterfront park. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In July, California agreed to foot the bulk of the $175 million bill for the nonprofit Trust for Public Land to purchase the 160-acre parcel at the border of Albany and Berkeley, with hopes to transform the Bay Area’s final horseracing track into a waterfront park. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The officials picture walking trails, sports fields and cafes replacing the iconic red and green grandstands and milelong oval track that drew horseracing fans — and college students looking for a cheap beer — for more than 80 years.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The officials picture walking trails, sports fields and cafes replacing the iconic red and green grandstands and milelong oval track that drew horseracing fans — and college students looking for a cheap beer — for more than 80 years.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“This place is so intertwined with so many people’s memories, and it’s super exciting to be… protecting this place for generations to come to continue to play,” said Guillermo Rodriguez, the Trust for Public Land’s state director. “But play something different — bet on kids running and not necessarily horses going around a racetrack.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“This place is so intertwined with so many people’s memories, and it’s super exciting to be… protecting this place for generations to come to continue to play,” said Guillermo Rodriguez, the Trust for Public Land’s state director. “But play something different — bet on kids running and not necessarily horses going around a racetrack.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12103025,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"align": "center",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103025\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103025\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/gallery",
"attrs": {
"linkTo": "none",
"images": [],
"ids": [],
"shortCodeTransforms": [],
"imageCrop": true,
"randomOrder": false,
"fixedHeight": true,
"sizeSlug": "large",
"allowResize": false,
"aspectRatio": "auto"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped\">\n\n\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped\">",
null,
"\n\n",
null,
"\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12103139,
"sizeSlug": "large",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": ""
},
"innerBlocks": [],
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103139\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103139\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
]
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12103148,
"sizeSlug": "large",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": ""
},
"innerBlocks": [],
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103148\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103148\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
]
}
]
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In June of 2024, Golden Gate Fields held its final race, bringing an 83-year run and horse racing in the Bay Area, to an end. Rodriguez recalled that as a UC Berkeley student in the 1990s, attending the track’s Sunday “Dollar Days,” featuring $1 entry tickets, hot dogs and beers, was a “rite of passage.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In June of 2024, Golden Gate Fields held its final race, bringing an 83-year run and horse racing in the Bay Area, to an end. Rodriguez recalled that as a UC Berkeley student in the 1990s, attending the track’s Sunday “Dollar Days,” featuring $1 entry tickets, hot dogs and beers, was a “rite of passage.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“It’s where we filled up with all our carbs,” he said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“It’s where we filled up with all our carbs,” he said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Across the bay, the racetrack at Tanforan in San Bruno shuttered more than 60 years ago. Bay Meadows in San Mateo closed in 2008 as interest in the sport waned and concerns grew about the safety of the horses at the tracks. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Across the bay, the racetrack at Tanforan in San Bruno shuttered more than 60 years ago. Bay Meadows in San Mateo closed in 2008 as interest in the sport waned and concerns grew about the safety of the horses at the tracks. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Animal rights activists estimated that \u003ca href=\"https://localnewsmatters.org/2024/06/07/golden-gate-fields-bows-out-storied-horse-track-goes-dark-after-final-race-this-sunday/\">thousands of horses died\u003c/a> at Golden Gate Fields during its operation. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Animal rights activists estimated that \u003ca href=\"https://localnewsmatters.org/2024/06/07/golden-gate-fields-bows-out-storied-horse-track-goes-dark-after-final-race-this-sunday/\">thousands of horses died\u003c/a> at Golden Gate Fields during its operation. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Both other tracks have been replaced with massive developments — a sprawling shopping center where Tanforan once stood and mixed-use housing and commercial space at Bay Meadows.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Both other tracks have been replaced with massive developments — a sprawling shopping center where Tanforan once stood and mixed-use housing and commercial space at Bay Meadows.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Rodriguez said that while those uses make sense for their locations, when Golden Gate Fields shuttered, it was the public’s turn to get a new open space. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Rodriguez said that while those uses make sense for their locations, when Golden Gate Fields shuttered, it was the public’s turn to get a new open space. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed-v2/related-articles",
"attrs": {
"postIds": [
"news_12099969"
],
"label": "Related Articles",
"maxPosts": 1,
"showImages": false,
"heroImage": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/04/260409-SunsetDunesAnniversary-11-BL_qed.jpg",
"query": "",
"labelWasCleared": false,
"heroImageAlt": "",
"heroImageLink": "",
"labelLink": "",
"alignment": "right",
"target": "_self",
"manualLinks": [],
"posts": []
},
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The Trust for Public Land announced earlier this year that it would purchase the property from the Canadian-owned Stronach Group, which still operates Santa Anita racetrack in Arcadia, and transfer it to the East Bay Regional Park District.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The Trust for Public Land announced earlier this year that it would purchase the property from the Canadian-owned Stronach Group, which still operates Santa Anita racetrack in Arcadia, and transfer it to the East Bay Regional Park District.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>While restoration and recreation will be at the forefront, what exactly will become of the parcel that once housed more than 1,000 horses and hundreds of workers in its “backstretch” hasn’t yet been decided. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>While restoration and recreation will be at the forefront, what exactly will become of the parcel that once housed more than 1,000 horses and hundreds of workers in its “backstretch” hasn’t yet been decided. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Rodriguez said there will be a robust community engagement process with nearby cities, which already began in Albany last week. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Rodriguez said there will be a robust community engagement process with nearby cities, which already began in Albany last week. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Mayor Peggy McQuaid said between the 100 people who packed into the Albany Community Center in person and even more who joined the meeting virtually, there were “a lot of different ideas from the community” — from public access to revenue-generating development.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Mayor Peggy McQuaid said between the 100 people who packed into the Albany Community Center in person and even more who joined the meeting virtually, there were “a lot of different ideas from the community” — from public access to revenue-generating development.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Everyone is excited about what’s really possible and exploring all the options,” she said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Everyone is excited about what’s really possible and exploring all the options,” she said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The elected officials who toured the site on Monday expressed similar hopes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The elected officials who toured the site on Monday expressed similar hopes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“I’m really excited to have it go back to nature, to have this open shoreline, to have beautiful fields. There are a lot of folks interested in having sports fields,” Berkeley Mayor Adena Ishii said. “I have three dogs, so I’m very excited to be able to bring them here and walk.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“I’m really excited to have it go back to nature, to have this open shoreline, to have beautiful fields. There are a lot of folks interested in having sports fields,” Berkeley Mayor Adena Ishii said. “I have three dogs, so I’m very excited to be able to bring them here and walk.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>California State Senator Jesse Arreguín said he would love to see some sort of museum or educational site focused on the natural habitat and role of the waterfront, which was wetlands before the racetrack was built. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>California State Senator Jesse Arreguín said he would love to see some sort of museum or educational site focused on the natural habitat and role of the waterfront, which was wetlands before the racetrack was built. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12103029,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"align": "center",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103029\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103029\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/gallery",
"attrs": {
"linkTo": "none",
"images": [],
"ids": [],
"shortCodeTransforms": [],
"imageCrop": true,
"randomOrder": false,
"fixedHeight": true,
"sizeSlug": "large",
"allowResize": false,
"aspectRatio": "auto"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped\">\n\n\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped\">",
null,
"\n\n",
null,
"\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12103141,
"sizeSlug": "large",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": ""
},
"innerBlocks": [],
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103141\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103141\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
]
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12103147,
"sizeSlug": "large",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": ""
},
"innerBlocks": [],
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103147\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Mayor of Albany Peggy McQuaid takes photos at Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103147\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Mayor of Albany Peggy McQuaid takes photos at Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
]
}
]
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>He also expressed support for some commercial use, especially since Golden Gate Fields generated more than $1 million in special revenue for the city of Albany, and about $700,000 for its school district.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>He also expressed support for some commercial use, especially since Golden Gate Fields generated more than $1 million in special revenue for the city of Albany, and about $700,000 for its school district.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“I would see some level of development in terms of restaurants or cafes … that also I think add to the attractiveness of open space,” East Bay Assemblymember Buffy Wicks said. “That also gives more revenue-generating opportunities.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“I would see some level of development in terms of restaurants or cafes … that also I think add to the attractiveness of open space,” East Bay Assemblymember Buffy Wicks said. “That also gives more revenue-generating opportunities.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“There’s a lot that can be done with this, and I think the mayor of Albany said it best — It’s such an enormous space that we can have all of these things,” she said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“There’s a lot that can be done with this, and I think the mayor of Albany said it best — It’s such an enormous space that we can have all of these things,” she said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12103143,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"align": "center",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103143\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Assemblymember Buffy Wicks speaks at Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103143\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Assemblymember Buffy Wicks speaks at Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Wicks said that when she first learned the track would close and land use would transition, she immediately asked whether it could be used for housing. While residential development isn’t entirely off the table, she said, it would come with “unique challenges.” \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Wicks said that when she first learned the track would close and land use would transition, she immediately asked whether it could be used for housing. While residential development isn’t entirely off the table, she said, it would come with “unique challenges.” \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Because of the land’s zoning, Albany voters would have to approve any residential development, according to Wicks. Adding the infrastructure needed to support housing on the land would also come with a significant cost.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Because of the land’s zoning, Albany voters would have to approve any residential development, according to Wicks. Adding the infrastructure needed to support housing on the land would also come with a significant cost.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“These are not insurmountable things, but they also just present a different kind of reality,” she said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“These are not insurmountable things, but they also just present a different kind of reality,” she said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12103031,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"align": "center",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103031\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103031\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>There are also parameters to the funding that the Trust for Public Land will use to purchase the $175 million parcel. Nearly three-fourths will come from statewide funds for Proposition 4, a voter-approved bond for climate projects, including land conservation.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>There are also parameters to the funding that the Trust for Public Land will use to purchase the $175 million parcel. Nearly three-fourths will come from statewide funds for Proposition 4, a voter-approved bond for climate projects, including land conservation.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The park district has pledged $20 million for the project, and the nonprofit is raising the remaining $30 million through private donors and additional public funding.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The park district has pledged $20 million for the project, and the nonprofit is raising the remaining $30 million through private donors and additional public funding.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The East Bay Regional Park District is expected to formally accept that it will take ownership of the property at a meeting on Oct. 20. The California Wildlife Conservation Board and California State Coastal Conservancy, two of the entities responsible for the state funds, will both hold votes on whether to approve the appropriations in November and December, respectively. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The East Bay Regional Park District is expected to formally accept that it will take ownership of the property at a meeting on Oct. 20. The California Wildlife Conservation Board and California State Coastal Conservancy, two of the entities responsible for the state funds, will both hold votes on whether to approve the appropriations in November and December, respectively. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>After all three votes, Rodriguez said the Trust for Public Land has until Dec. 15 to exercise its option agreement to purchase the property.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>After all three votes, Rodriguez said the Trust for Public Land has until Dec. 15 to exercise its option agreement to purchase the property.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“We’re ending the preamble, and now the work begins,” McQuaid, the Albany mayor, said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“We’re ending the preamble, and now the work begins,” McQuaid, the Albany mayor, said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "The former racetrack closed in 2024.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791394283,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 29,
"wordCount": 1325
},
"headData": {
"title": "Golden Gate Fields on Track to Become Waterfront Park | KQED",
"description": "The former racetrack closed in 2024.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Golden Gate Fields on Track to Become Waterfront Park",
"datePublished": "2026-10-06T12:00:33-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-07T10:31:23-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 28250,
"slug": "local",
"name": "Local"
},
"audioUrl": "https://traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/0af137ef-751e-4b19-a055-aaef00d2d578/ffca7e9f-6831-41c5-bcaf-aaef00f5a073/c077e8be-7a23-4c73-ba5c-b4dc011b2b88/audio.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12102938",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12102938/golden-gate-fields-on-track-to-become-waterfront-park",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003cp>East Bay officials took a goodbye tour on Monday of the shuttered Golden Gate Fields racetrack, which is slated to take the first step toward becoming a vast public open space for residents later this year. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In July, California agreed to foot the bulk of the $175 million bill for the nonprofit Trust for Public Land to purchase the 160-acre parcel at the border of Albany and Berkeley, with hopes to transform the Bay Area’s final horseracing track into a waterfront park. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The officials picture walking trails, sports fields and cafes replacing the iconic red and green grandstands and milelong oval track that drew horseracing fans — and college students looking for a cheap beer — for more than 80 years.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“This place is so intertwined with so many people’s memories, and it’s super exciting to be… protecting this place for generations to come to continue to play,” said Guillermo Rodriguez, the Trust for Public Land’s state director. “But play something different — bet on kids running and not necessarily horses going around a racetrack.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1999\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103025\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-16_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1999px) 100vw, 1999px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped wp-block-gallery-5 is-layout-flex wp-block-gallery-is-layout-flex\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" data-id=\"12103139\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103139\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-3-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" data-id=\"12103148\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103148\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-63-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In June of 2024, Golden Gate Fields held its final race, bringing an 83-year run and horse racing in the Bay Area, to an end. Rodriguez recalled that as a UC Berkeley student in the 1990s, attending the track’s Sunday “Dollar Days,” featuring $1 entry tickets, hot dogs and beers, was a “rite of passage.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“It’s where we filled up with all our carbs,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Across the bay, the racetrack at Tanforan in San Bruno shuttered more than 60 years ago. Bay Meadows in San Mateo closed in 2008 as interest in the sport waned and concerns grew about the safety of the horses at the tracks. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Animal rights activists estimated that \u003ca href=\"https://localnewsmatters.org/2024/06/07/golden-gate-fields-bows-out-storied-horse-track-goes-dark-after-final-race-this-sunday/\">thousands of horses died\u003c/a> at Golden Gate Fields during its operation. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Both other tracks have been replaced with massive developments — a sprawling shopping center where Tanforan once stood and mixed-use housing and commercial space at Bay Meadows.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Rodriguez said that while those uses make sense for their locations, when Golden Gate Fields shuttered, it was the public’s turn to get a new open space. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The Trust for Public Land announced earlier this year that it would purchase the property from the Canadian-owned Stronach Group, which still operates Santa Anita racetrack in Arcadia, and transfer it to the East Bay Regional Park District.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>While restoration and recreation will be at the forefront, what exactly will become of the parcel that once housed more than 1,000 horses and hundreds of workers in its “backstretch” hasn’t yet been decided. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Rodriguez said there will be a robust community engagement process with nearby cities, which already began in Albany last week. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Mayor Peggy McQuaid said between the 100 people who packed into the Albany Community Center in person and even more who joined the meeting virtually, there were “a lot of different ideas from the community” — from public access to revenue-generating development.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Everyone is excited about what’s really possible and exploring all the options,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The elected officials who toured the site on Monday expressed similar hopes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I’m really excited to have it go back to nature, to have this open shoreline, to have beautiful fields. There are a lot of folks interested in having sports fields,” Berkeley Mayor Adena Ishii said. “I have three dogs, so I’m very excited to be able to bring them here and walk.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>California State Senator Jesse Arreguín said he would love to see some sort of museum or educational site focused on the natural habitat and role of the waterfront, which was wetlands before the racetrack was built. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103029\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-30_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year.\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-gallery has-nested-images columns-default is-cropped wp-block-gallery-6 is-layout-flex wp-block-gallery-is-layout-flex\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" data-id=\"12103141\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103141\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-21-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" data-id=\"12103147\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103147\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-51-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Mayor of Albany Peggy McQuaid takes photos at Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>He also expressed support for some commercial use, especially since Golden Gate Fields generated more than $1 million in special revenue for the city of Albany, and about $700,000 for its school district.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I would see some level of development in terms of restaurants or cafes … that also I think add to the attractiveness of open space,” East Bay Assemblymember Buffy Wicks said. “That also gives more revenue-generating opportunities.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“There’s a lot that can be done with this, and I think the mayor of Albany said it best — It’s such an enormous space that we can have all of these things,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103143\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GOLDENGATEFIELDS-NG-35-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Assemblymember Buffy Wicks speaks at Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>Wicks said that when she first learned the track would close and land use would transition, she immediately asked whether it could be used for housing. While residential development isn’t entirely off the table, she said, it would come with “unique challenges.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Because of the land’s zoning, Albany voters would have to approve any residential development, according to Wicks. Adding the infrastructure needed to support housing on the land would also come with a significant cost.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“These are not insurmountable things, but they also just present a different kind of reality,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103031\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/261005-GoldenGateFields-NG-54_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Golden Gate Fields, a former horse racing track, on the border of Albany and Berkeley on Oct. 5, 2026. The Trust for Public Land plans to buy the $175 million property by the end of the year. (Nina Glick/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>There are also parameters to the funding that the Trust for Public Land will use to purchase the $175 million parcel. Nearly three-fourths will come from statewide funds for Proposition 4, a voter-approved bond for climate projects, including land conservation.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The park district has pledged $20 million for the project, and the nonprofit is raising the remaining $30 million through private donors and additional public funding.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The East Bay Regional Park District is expected to formally accept that it will take ownership of the property at a meeting on Oct. 20. The California Wildlife Conservation Board and California State Coastal Conservancy, two of the entities responsible for the state funds, will both hold votes on whether to approve the appropriations in November and December, respectively. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>After all three votes, Rodriguez said the Trust for Public Land has until Dec. 15 to exercise its option agreement to purchase the property.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We’re ending the preamble, and now the work begins,” McQuaid, the Albany mayor, said.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12102938/golden-gate-fields-on-track-to-become-waterfront-park",
"authors": [
"11913"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_19906",
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_1386",
"news_20179",
"news_18538",
"news_6938",
"news_28848",
"news_6243",
"news_36379",
"news_2905"
],
"featImg": "news_12103034",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12103028": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12103028",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12103028",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791309600000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "should-you-use-usps-to-mail-your-midterm-ballot-heres-what-california-election-officials-say",
"title": "Should You Use USPS to Mail Your Midterm Ballot? Here’s What California Election Officials Say",
"publishDate": 1791309600,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Should You Use USPS to Mail Your Midterm Ballot? Here’s What California Election Officials Say | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\n\u003cp>County election officials this week began mailing ballots to every registered \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California\u003c/a> voter for the Nov. 3 midterm election, kicking off a monthlong vote-by-mail stretch — albeit one shadowed by a series of federal challenges to the system. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>President Donald Trump has kept up his attacks on mail voting this year, which he has claimed, without evidence, is rife with fraud. The administration’s efforts to drastically limit voting by mail have ranged from an \u003ca href=\"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/\">executive order \u003c/a>giving the United States Postal Service the unprecedented role of deciding who receives mail ballots to pushing Congress to require photo ID at the polls. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>So far, those moves have failed. But the USPS has also changed how some mail is collected — leaving many voters unsure whether the agency can reliably deliver their ballots this fall.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Keep reading for what we know about using USPS to mail your midterm ballot this election season. And remember: Aside from those USPS collection boxes, voters have several other options to submit their mail-in ballot, including using a secure county drop box or submitting by hand to any open voting location.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n\u003cli>\u003cstrong>Jump to: \u003ca href=\"#mail-in-ballot\">Should I mail my ballot through USPS?\u003c/a> \u003c/strong>\u003c/li>\n\u003c/ul>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What’s changed at USPS — and what does it mean for my ballot?\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Two changes to USPS in recent years have slowed down service in many regions, especially for voters in rural areas. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>First, starting in April 2025, USPS implemented what’s called its Regional Transportation Optimization (RTO) initiative nationwide. At post offices and collection boxes more than 50 miles from a processing center, the RTO means mail is now \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12085378/usps-changes-ballot-drop-box-near-me-deadline-california-primary-vote-for-governor\">picked up the next day\u003c/a> instead of the same day. Northern California has just two processing centers, in Richmond and Sacramento. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1999\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103052\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1999px) 100vw, 1999px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Porfirio Diaz fills out his mail-in ballot for California’s gubernatorial recall election at his home in Oakland on Sept. 9, 2021. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Second, in December 2025, USPS formally \u003ca href=\"https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/24/2025-20740/postmarks-and-postal-possession\">defined a postmark\u003c/a> as confirmation that the agency was in possession of the mail, but not necessarily the date it first \u003cem>received \u003c/em>the mail. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But what do these changes mean for your ballot arriving in time to be counted in the Nov. 3 election — which in California is \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail\">seven days after Election Day\u003c/a>, as long as it’s postmarked by or on Election Day? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>If you drop your ballot in a post office or box, it may not get a postmark until USPS picks it up, trucks it to a processing center and stamps it. That could be days later. Many voters assume they have until Election Day to mail a ballot, but if it’s postmarked \u003cem>after \u003c/em>Nov. 3, it will be rejected. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Because of mail processing facility shutdowns, our mail — including our election mail — takes a more circuitous route to get to the county elections office than it used to,” said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the non-partisan California Voter Foundation. “In some counties, the mail actually goes to a processing center in Nevada and then comes back to California.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In California, nearly 90% of voters cast their ballots by mail in the statewide June primary. And more ballots are now showing up too late to be counted in recent years. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In the 2026 primary, \u003ca href=\"https://www.ppic.org/publication/understanding-increases-in-late-vote-by-mail-ballots-in-california/\">1.1% of all California mail ballots\u003c/a> arrived late, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. That’s up from 0.7% in the 2025 special election and 0.3% in 2024. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I personally find it heartbreaking when I see those stacks of uncounted ballots sitting in election offices, because I know how much work goes into filling out a ballot,” Alexander said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The PPIC report found the increase in rejection rates was concentrated in areas affected by the RTO, even after accounting for other differences. But the report concluded that California’s overall rise in rejected ballots can’t be pinned wholly on the USPS changes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"mail-in-ballot\">So how \u003cem>do \u003c/em>election officials recommend I submit my mail-in ballot?\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In the last two statewide elections, Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Attorney General Rob Bonta urged any voters planning to use USPS to mail in their ballots \u003ca href=\"https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-and-secretary-state-weber-sacramento-vote-early-june\">at \u003cem>least \u003c/em>a week before Election Day\u003c/a> to account for those USPS changes. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>And if you’re mailing your midterm ballot on Election Day itself, Weber’s office is recommending you \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail\">“get a hand-stamped postmark\u003c/a> from a postal employee inside a United States Post Office” rather than simply dropping it in a USPS collection box.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But some officials are going further and steering voters away from using USPS altogether. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12082088\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">A San Francisco official mail-in ballot for the Nov. 3, 2020 election. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We’re not really encouraging people to use the USPS to get their ballot here,” said Evelyn Mendez, Sonoma County’s registrar of voters. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Instead, Mendez tells voters to use county collection boxes, which skip the Postal Service. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“If they use one of our official ballot drop boxes, our team picks those ballots up every day and brings them right back here,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Mendez cited the uptick in late ballots in the June primary as the driving force behind her warning about USPS. Sonoma County rejected \u003ca href=\"https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/vbm-rejection-reason/2026/june-primary-2026.pdf\">1,598 ballots\u003c/a> for arriving late, accounting for 0.95% of vote-by-mail ballots returned in the county. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Ballot drop boxes are now open 24/7 through 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. Voters from anywhere in California can use them, even if they’re not registered in that county. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Mendez said voters who still want to use USPS should go inside the post office and request that hand stamp to ensure it’s postmarked on time. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Sometimes we’ll get ballots that have two different dates, and it’s because someone got it hand-stamped in the office and then it got stamped when it went through the process — but they’re still getting here late,” she said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Alexander’s top recommendation is to turn in your mail ballot at a voting site as an in-person ballot. The option, known as “Sign, Scan and Go” voting, allows voters to bring their mail ballot to a vote center and sign a roster under penalty of perjury — just as you would for in-person voting. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Newsom expanded the option this year after signing \u003ca href=\"https://www.gov.ca.gov/2026/09/19/governor-newsom-signs-new-laws-to-protect-california-elections-from-trump-interference/\">Senate Bill 1420\u003c/a> last month to raise awareness and access to this service.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Alexander said this approach sidesteps time-intensive \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082075/california-primary-elections-2026-faq-governors-race-vote-ballot-signature-how-to-correct-mistake\">signature verification\u003c/a> — since your signature only goes on your ballot’s envelope, and the envelope isn’t necessary with Sign, Scan and Go — and late-arrival ballot rejections. She said it also speeds up California’s vote count, which drew criticism after the June primary when it took nearly a week to settle the governor’s and Los Angeles mayor’s races.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Dropping off your ballot in person at a vote center like this “really solves a lot of challenges, and it’s a win-win for the voter and for the elections office,” she said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How can I track my ballot?\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>You can track your ballot through \u003ca href=\"https://california.ballottrax.net/voter/\">BallotTrax\u003c/a>, the state’s “Where’s My Ballot” site. The service sends alerts when your ballot is mailed, delivered and received by the county. Plus, you’ll be notified if the county flags an issue, such as a signature challenge. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“That allows you to get a jump on correcting those issues, so your ballot can be counted,” Alexander said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Where do Trump’s attacks on mail-in voting legally stand right now?\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In March, Trump issued \u003ca href=\"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/\">an executive order to restrict mail voting\u003c/a>. The order would have required USPS — an agency within the federal government — to send mail ballots only to voters on a federal list of “approved” voters. It also would have charged the Department of Justice with prosecuting election officials who issue ballots to ineligible voters. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>A federal judge \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/25/us/politics/trump-mail-in-voting-ruling.html\">issued a swift ruling\u003c/a> preventing USPS from implementing the order — which the Supreme Court then \u003ca href=\"https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/09/supreme-court-denies-trump-administrations-request-to-implement-parts-of-usps-rule-on-mail-in-vo/\">left in place\u003c/a> in September. However, a USPS \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/01/us/politics/whistle-blower-voting-by-mail.html\">whistleblower alleged\u003c/a> the agency secretly prepared to follow Trump’s order even as the matter was still being fought over in the courts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Alexander said USPS’ leaders showed they were “sympathetic to” strategies that would restrict mail voting, costing the agency trust even though the effort failed. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1920\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-scaled.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12095894\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-scaled.jpg 2560w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-2000x1500.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-160x120.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-1536x1152.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-2048x1536.jpg 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2560px) 100vw, 2560px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Close-up of ballot drop box outside of polling place\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I think that has really shaken a lot of people’s confidence. I know it’s shaken mine,” she said. “Up until this election, I felt like the U.S. Postal Service was a reliable partner in the voting process.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The administration originally considered an even \u003ca href=\"https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-plan-to-restrict-mail-voting\">more disruptive restriction\u003c/a> on mail voting, according to new reporting from ProPublica. It would have required USPS to send all ballots by certified mail, meaning voters would have had to be home to sign for them in order to receive them. The Postal Service objected, and the White House ultimately backed down. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Additionally, the Supreme Court in July upheld a Mississippi state law that allows officials to count mail ballots postmarked by Election Day but received later. The Republican National Committee brought the case in 2024, arguing grace periods violate the Constitution. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>18 states and territories, including California, also permit grace periods to account for mail delays beyond voters’ control. In the 2024 general election, 373,116 ballots arrived within the grace period and were counted in California.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Thankfully, we avoided two potentially very harmful policy changes that would have dramatically impacted California voters,” Alexander said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Trump has also repeatedly pressed Congress to pass his SAVE America Act. The bill would ban mail voting except for illness, disability, military service or travel, in addition to requiring proof of citizenship during registration and photo ID at the polls. \u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>County election officials this week began mailing ballots to every registered \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California\u003c/a> voter for the Nov. 3 midterm election, kicking off a monthlong vote-by-mail stretch — albeit one shadowed by a series of federal challenges to the system. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>County election officials this week began mailing ballots to every registered \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California\u003c/a> voter for the Nov. 3 midterm election, kicking off a monthlong vote-by-mail stretch — albeit one shadowed by a series of federal challenges to the system. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>President Donald Trump has kept up his attacks on mail voting this year, which he has claimed, without evidence, is rife with fraud. The administration’s efforts to drastically limit voting by mail have ranged from an \u003ca href=\"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/\">executive order \u003c/a>giving the United States Postal Service the unprecedented role of deciding who receives mail ballots to pushing Congress to require photo ID at the polls. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>President Donald Trump has kept up his attacks on mail voting this year, which he has claimed, without evidence, is rife with fraud. The administration’s efforts to drastically limit voting by mail have ranged from an \u003ca href=\"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/\">executive order \u003c/a>giving the United States Postal Service the unprecedented role of deciding who receives mail ballots to pushing Congress to require photo ID at the polls. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>So far, those moves have failed. But the USPS has also changed how some mail is collected — leaving many voters unsure whether the agency can reliably deliver their ballots this fall.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>So far, those moves have failed. But the USPS has also changed how some mail is collected — leaving many voters unsure whether the agency can reliably deliver their ballots this fall.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Keep reading for what we know about using USPS to mail your midterm ballot this election season. And remember: Aside from those USPS collection boxes, voters have several other options to submit their mail-in ballot, including using a secure county drop box or submitting by hand to any open voting location.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Keep reading for what we know about using USPS to mail your midterm ballot this election season. And remember: Aside from those USPS collection boxes, voters have several other options to submit their mail-in ballot, including using a secure county drop box or submitting by hand to any open voting location.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/list",
"attrs": {
"items": [
"Jump to: Should I mail my ballot through USPS? "
],
"ordered": false,
"values": ""
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cul class=\"wp-block-list\">\u003c/ul>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cul class=\"wp-block-list\">",
null,
"\u003c/ul>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/list-item",
"attrs": [],
"innerBlocks": [],
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cli>\u003cstrong>Jump to: \u003ca href=\"#mail-in-ballot\">Should I mail my ballot through USPS?\u003c/a> \u003c/strong>\u003c/li>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cli>\u003cstrong>Jump to: \u003ca href=\"#mail-in-ballot\">Should I mail my ballot through USPS?\u003c/a> \u003c/strong>\u003c/li>\n"
]
}
]
},
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "What’s changed at USPS — and what does it mean for my ballot?",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What’s changed at USPS — and what does it mean for my ballot?\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What’s changed at USPS — and what does it mean for my ballot?\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Two changes to USPS in recent years have slowed down service in many regions, especially for voters in rural areas. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Two changes to USPS in recent years have slowed down service in many regions, especially for voters in rural areas. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>First, starting in April 2025, USPS implemented what’s called its Regional Transportation Optimization (RTO) initiative nationwide. At post offices and collection boxes more than 50 miles from a processing center, the RTO means mail is now \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12085378/usps-changes-ballot-drop-box-near-me-deadline-california-primary-vote-for-governor\">picked up the next day\u003c/a> instead of the same day. Northern California has just two processing centers, in Richmond and Sacramento. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>First, starting in April 2025, USPS implemented what’s called its Regional Transportation Optimization (RTO) initiative nationwide. At post offices and collection boxes more than 50 miles from a processing center, the RTO means mail is now \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12085378/usps-changes-ballot-drop-box-near-me-deadline-california-primary-vote-for-governor\">picked up the next day\u003c/a> instead of the same day. Northern California has just two processing centers, in Richmond and Sacramento. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12103052,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103052\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Porfirio Diaz fills out his mail-in ballot for California’s gubernatorial recall election at his home in Oakland on Sept. 9, 2021.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103052\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Porfirio Diaz fills out his mail-in ballot for California’s gubernatorial recall election at his home in Oakland on Sept. 9, 2021.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Second, in December 2025, USPS formally \u003ca href=\"https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/24/2025-20740/postmarks-and-postal-possession\">defined a postmark\u003c/a> as confirmation that the agency was in possession of the mail, but not necessarily the date it first \u003cem>received \u003c/em>the mail. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Second, in December 2025, USPS formally \u003ca href=\"https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/24/2025-20740/postmarks-and-postal-possession\">defined a postmark\u003c/a> as confirmation that the agency was in possession of the mail, but not necessarily the date it first \u003cem>received \u003c/em>the mail. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>But what do these changes mean for your ballot arriving in time to be counted in the Nov. 3 election — which in California is \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail\">seven days after Election Day\u003c/a>, as long as it’s postmarked by or on Election Day? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>But what do these changes mean for your ballot arriving in time to be counted in the Nov. 3 election — which in California is \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail\">seven days after Election Day\u003c/a>, as long as it’s postmarked by or on Election Day? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>If you drop your ballot in a post office or box, it may not get a postmark until USPS picks it up, trucks it to a processing center and stamps it. That could be days later. Many voters assume they have until Election Day to mail a ballot, but if it’s postmarked \u003cem>after \u003c/em>Nov. 3, it will be rejected. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>If you drop your ballot in a post office or box, it may not get a postmark until USPS picks it up, trucks it to a processing center and stamps it. That could be days later. Many voters assume they have until Election Day to mail a ballot, but if it’s postmarked \u003cem>after \u003c/em>Nov. 3, it will be rejected. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed-v2/related-articles",
"attrs": {
"postIds": [
"news_12085378"
],
"label": "Related Articles",
"maxPosts": 1,
"showImages": false,
"heroImage": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/11/GettyImages-2244994619-1536x1019.jpg",
"query": "",
"labelWasCleared": false,
"heroImageAlt": "",
"heroImageLink": "",
"labelLink": "",
"alignment": "right",
"target": "_self",
"manualLinks": [],
"posts": []
},
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Because of mail processing facility shutdowns, our mail — including our election mail — takes a more circuitous route to get to the county elections office than it used to,” said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the non-partisan California Voter Foundation. “In some counties, the mail actually goes to a processing center in Nevada and then comes back to California.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Because of mail processing facility shutdowns, our mail — including our election mail — takes a more circuitous route to get to the county elections office than it used to,” said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the non-partisan California Voter Foundation. “In some counties, the mail actually goes to a processing center in Nevada and then comes back to California.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In California, nearly 90% of voters cast their ballots by mail in the statewide June primary. And more ballots are now showing up too late to be counted in recent years. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In California, nearly 90% of voters cast their ballots by mail in the statewide June primary. And more ballots are now showing up too late to be counted in recent years. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In the 2026 primary, \u003ca href=\"https://www.ppic.org/publication/understanding-increases-in-late-vote-by-mail-ballots-in-california/\">1.1% of all California mail ballots\u003c/a> arrived late, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. That’s up from 0.7% in the 2025 special election and 0.3% in 2024. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In the 2026 primary, \u003ca href=\"https://www.ppic.org/publication/understanding-increases-in-late-vote-by-mail-ballots-in-california/\">1.1% of all California mail ballots\u003c/a> arrived late, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. That’s up from 0.7% in the 2025 special election and 0.3% in 2024. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“I personally find it heartbreaking when I see those stacks of uncounted ballots sitting in election offices, because I know how much work goes into filling out a ballot,” Alexander said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“I personally find it heartbreaking when I see those stacks of uncounted ballots sitting in election offices, because I know how much work goes into filling out a ballot,” Alexander said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The PPIC report found the increase in rejection rates was concentrated in areas affected by the RTO, even after accounting for other differences. But the report concluded that California’s overall rise in rejected ballots can’t be pinned wholly on the USPS changes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The PPIC report found the increase in rejection rates was concentrated in areas affected by the RTO, even after accounting for other differences. But the report concluded that California’s overall rise in rejected ballots can’t be pinned wholly on the USPS changes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "So how do election officials recommend I submit my mail-in ballot? ",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"mail-in-ballot\">So how \u003cem>do \u003c/em>election officials recommend I submit my mail-in ballot?\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"mail-in-ballot\">So how \u003cem>do \u003c/em>election officials recommend I submit my mail-in ballot?\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In the last two statewide elections, Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Attorney General Rob Bonta urged any voters planning to use USPS to mail in their ballots \u003ca href=\"https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-and-secretary-state-weber-sacramento-vote-early-june\">at \u003cem>least \u003c/em>a week before Election Day\u003c/a> to account for those USPS changes. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In the last two statewide elections, Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Attorney General Rob Bonta urged any voters planning to use USPS to mail in their ballots \u003ca href=\"https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-and-secretary-state-weber-sacramento-vote-early-june\">at \u003cem>least \u003c/em>a week before Election Day\u003c/a> to account for those USPS changes. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>And if you’re mailing your midterm ballot on Election Day itself, Weber’s office is recommending you \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail\">“get a hand-stamped postmark\u003c/a> from a postal employee inside a United States Post Office” rather than simply dropping it in a USPS collection box.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>And if you’re mailing your midterm ballot on Election Day itself, Weber’s office is recommending you \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail\">“get a hand-stamped postmark\u003c/a> from a postal employee inside a United States Post Office” rather than simply dropping it in a USPS collection box.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>But some officials are going further and steering voters away from using USPS altogether. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>But some officials are going further and steering voters away from using USPS altogether. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12082088,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12082088\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">A San Francisco official mail-in ballot for the Nov. 3, 2020 election.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12082088\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">A San Francisco official mail-in ballot for the Nov. 3, 2020 election.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“We’re not really encouraging people to use the USPS to get their ballot here,” said Evelyn Mendez, Sonoma County’s registrar of voters. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“We’re not really encouraging people to use the USPS to get their ballot here,” said Evelyn Mendez, Sonoma County’s registrar of voters. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Instead, Mendez tells voters to use county collection boxes, which skip the Postal Service. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Instead, Mendez tells voters to use county collection boxes, which skip the Postal Service. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“If they use one of our official ballot drop boxes, our team picks those ballots up every day and brings them right back here,” she said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“If they use one of our official ballot drop boxes, our team picks those ballots up every day and brings them right back here,” she said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Mendez cited the uptick in late ballots in the June primary as the driving force behind her warning about USPS. Sonoma County rejected \u003ca href=\"https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/vbm-rejection-reason/2026/june-primary-2026.pdf\">1,598 ballots\u003c/a> for arriving late, accounting for 0.95% of vote-by-mail ballots returned in the county. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Mendez cited the uptick in late ballots in the June primary as the driving force behind her warning about USPS. Sonoma County rejected \u003ca href=\"https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/vbm-rejection-reason/2026/june-primary-2026.pdf\">1,598 ballots\u003c/a> for arriving late, accounting for 0.95% of vote-by-mail ballots returned in the county. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Ballot drop boxes are now open 24/7 through 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. Voters from anywhere in California can use them, even if they’re not registered in that county. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Ballot drop boxes are now open 24/7 through 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. Voters from anywhere in California can use them, even if they’re not registered in that county. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Mendez said voters who still want to use USPS should go inside the post office and request that hand stamp to ensure it’s postmarked on time. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Mendez said voters who still want to use USPS should go inside the post office and request that hand stamp to ensure it’s postmarked on time. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed-v2/related-articles",
"attrs": {
"label": "2026 California Voter Guide",
"heroImage": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/80/2026/09/Aside-California-Voter-Guide-2026-Midterm-Election-1200x1200@2x.png",
"heroImageLink": "https://www.kqed.org/voterguide",
"manualLinks": [
{
"url": "https://www.kqed.org/voterguide",
"title": "Learn everything you need to cast an informed ballot for the 2026 election"
}
],
"query": "",
"postIds": [],
"labelWasCleared": false,
"maxPosts": 3,
"showImages": true,
"heroImageAlt": "",
"labelLink": "",
"alignment": "right",
"target": "_self",
"posts": []
},
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Sometimes we’ll get ballots that have two different dates, and it’s because someone got it hand-stamped in the office and then it got stamped when it went through the process — but they’re still getting here late,” she said. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Sometimes we’ll get ballots that have two different dates, and it’s because someone got it hand-stamped in the office and then it got stamped when it went through the process — but they’re still getting here late,” she said. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Alexander’s top recommendation is to turn in your mail ballot at a voting site as an in-person ballot. The option, known as “Sign, Scan and Go” voting, allows voters to bring their mail ballot to a vote center and sign a roster under penalty of perjury — just as you would for in-person voting. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Alexander’s top recommendation is to turn in your mail ballot at a voting site as an in-person ballot. The option, known as “Sign, Scan and Go” voting, allows voters to bring their mail ballot to a vote center and sign a roster under penalty of perjury — just as you would for in-person voting. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Newsom expanded the option this year after signing \u003ca href=\"https://www.gov.ca.gov/2026/09/19/governor-newsom-signs-new-laws-to-protect-california-elections-from-trump-interference/\">Senate Bill 1420\u003c/a> last month to raise awareness and access to this service.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Newsom expanded the option this year after signing \u003ca href=\"https://www.gov.ca.gov/2026/09/19/governor-newsom-signs-new-laws-to-protect-california-elections-from-trump-interference/\">Senate Bill 1420\u003c/a> last month to raise awareness and access to this service.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Alexander said this approach sidesteps time-intensive \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082075/california-primary-elections-2026-faq-governors-race-vote-ballot-signature-how-to-correct-mistake\">signature verification\u003c/a> — since your signature only goes on your ballot’s envelope, and the envelope isn’t necessary with Sign, Scan and Go — and late-arrival ballot rejections. She said it also speeds up California’s vote count, which drew criticism after the June primary when it took nearly a week to settle the governor’s and Los Angeles mayor’s races.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Alexander said this approach sidesteps time-intensive \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082075/california-primary-elections-2026-faq-governors-race-vote-ballot-signature-how-to-correct-mistake\">signature verification\u003c/a> — since your signature only goes on your ballot’s envelope, and the envelope isn’t necessary with Sign, Scan and Go — and late-arrival ballot rejections. She said it also speeds up California’s vote count, which drew criticism after the June primary when it took nearly a week to settle the governor’s and Los Angeles mayor’s races.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Dropping off your ballot in person at a vote center like this “really solves a lot of challenges, and it’s a win-win for the voter and for the elections office,” she said. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Dropping off your ballot in person at a vote center like this “really solves a lot of challenges, and it’s a win-win for the voter and for the elections office,” she said. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "How can I track my ballot?",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How can I track my ballot?\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How can I track my ballot?\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>You can track your ballot through \u003ca href=\"https://california.ballottrax.net/voter/\">BallotTrax\u003c/a>, the state’s “Where’s My Ballot” site. The service sends alerts when your ballot is mailed, delivered and received by the county. Plus, you’ll be notified if the county flags an issue, such as a signature challenge. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>You can track your ballot through \u003ca href=\"https://california.ballottrax.net/voter/\">BallotTrax\u003c/a>, the state’s “Where’s My Ballot” site. The service sends alerts when your ballot is mailed, delivered and received by the county. Plus, you’ll be notified if the county flags an issue, such as a signature challenge. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“That allows you to get a jump on correcting those issues, so your ballot can be counted,” Alexander said. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“That allows you to get a jump on correcting those issues, so your ballot can be counted,” Alexander said. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Where do Trump’s attacks on mail-in voting legally stand right now?",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Where do Trump’s attacks on mail-in voting legally stand right now?\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Where do Trump’s attacks on mail-in voting legally stand right now?\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In March, Trump issued \u003ca href=\"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/\">an executive order to restrict mail voting\u003c/a>. The order would have required USPS — an agency within the federal government — to send mail ballots only to voters on a federal list of “approved” voters. It also would have charged the Department of Justice with prosecuting election officials who issue ballots to ineligible voters. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In March, Trump issued \u003ca href=\"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/\">an executive order to restrict mail voting\u003c/a>. The order would have required USPS — an agency within the federal government — to send mail ballots only to voters on a federal list of “approved” voters. It also would have charged the Department of Justice with prosecuting election officials who issue ballots to ineligible voters. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>A federal judge \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/25/us/politics/trump-mail-in-voting-ruling.html\">issued a swift ruling\u003c/a> preventing USPS from implementing the order — which the Supreme Court then \u003ca href=\"https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/09/supreme-court-denies-trump-administrations-request-to-implement-parts-of-usps-rule-on-mail-in-vo/\">left in place\u003c/a> in September. However, a USPS \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/01/us/politics/whistle-blower-voting-by-mail.html\">whistleblower alleged\u003c/a> the agency secretly prepared to follow Trump’s order even as the matter was still being fought over in the courts. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>A federal judge \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/25/us/politics/trump-mail-in-voting-ruling.html\">issued a swift ruling\u003c/a> preventing USPS from implementing the order — which the Supreme Court then \u003ca href=\"https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/09/supreme-court-denies-trump-administrations-request-to-implement-parts-of-usps-rule-on-mail-in-vo/\">left in place\u003c/a> in September. However, a USPS \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/01/us/politics/whistle-blower-voting-by-mail.html\">whistleblower alleged\u003c/a> the agency secretly prepared to follow Trump’s order even as the matter was still being fought over in the courts. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Alexander said USPS’ leaders showed they were “sympathetic to” strategies that would restrict mail voting, costing the agency trust even though the effort failed. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Alexander said USPS’ leaders showed they were “sympathetic to” strategies that would restrict mail voting, costing the agency trust even though the effort failed. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12095894,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-scaled.jpg 2560w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-2000x1500.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-160x120.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-1536x1152.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-2048x1536.jpg 2048w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-scaled.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12095894\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-scaled.jpg 2560w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-2000x1500.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-160x120.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-1536x1152.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-2048x1536.jpg 2048w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Close-up of ballot drop box outside of polling place\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-scaled.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12095894\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Close-up of ballot drop box outside of polling place\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“I think that has really shaken a lot of people’s confidence. I know it’s shaken mine,” she said. “Up until this election, I felt like the U.S. Postal Service was a reliable partner in the voting process.” \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“I think that has really shaken a lot of people’s confidence. I know it’s shaken mine,” she said. “Up until this election, I felt like the U.S. Postal Service was a reliable partner in the voting process.” \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The administration originally considered an even \u003ca href=\"https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-plan-to-restrict-mail-voting\">more disruptive restriction\u003c/a> on mail voting, according to new reporting from ProPublica. It would have required USPS to send all ballots by certified mail, meaning voters would have had to be home to sign for them in order to receive them. The Postal Service objected, and the White House ultimately backed down. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The administration originally considered an even \u003ca href=\"https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-plan-to-restrict-mail-voting\">more disruptive restriction\u003c/a> on mail voting, according to new reporting from ProPublica. It would have required USPS to send all ballots by certified mail, meaning voters would have had to be home to sign for them in order to receive them. The Postal Service objected, and the White House ultimately backed down. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Additionally, the Supreme Court in July upheld a Mississippi state law that allows officials to count mail ballots postmarked by Election Day but received later. The Republican National Committee brought the case in 2024, arguing grace periods violate the Constitution. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Additionally, the Supreme Court in July upheld a Mississippi state law that allows officials to count mail ballots postmarked by Election Day but received later. The Republican National Committee brought the case in 2024, arguing grace periods violate the Constitution. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>18 states and territories, including California, also permit grace periods to account for mail delays beyond voters’ control. In the 2024 general election, 373,116 ballots arrived within the grace period and were counted in California.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>18 states and territories, including California, also permit grace periods to account for mail delays beyond voters’ control. In the 2024 general election, 373,116 ballots arrived within the grace period and were counted in California.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Thankfully, we avoided two potentially very harmful policy changes that would have dramatically impacted California voters,” Alexander said. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Thankfully, we avoided two potentially very harmful policy changes that would have dramatically impacted California voters,” Alexander said. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Trump has also repeatedly pressed Congress to pass his SAVE America Act. The bill would ban mail voting except for illness, disability, military service or travel, in addition to requiring proof of citizenship during registration and photo ID at the polls. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Trump has also repeatedly pressed Congress to pass his SAVE America Act. The bill would ban mail voting except for illness, disability, military service or travel, in addition to requiring proof of citizenship during registration and photo ID at the polls. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "With recent changes to how the U.S. Postal Service operates and President Trump’s attacks on mail voting, here’s what to know.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791324665,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 39,
"wordCount": 1645
},
"headData": {
"title": "Should You Use USPS to Mail Your Midterm Ballot? Here’s What California Election Officials Say | KQED",
"description": "With recent changes to how the U.S. Postal Service operates and President Trump’s attacks on mail voting, here’s what to know.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Should You Use USPS to Mail Your Midterm Ballot? Here’s What California Election Officials Say",
"datePublished": "2026-10-06T11:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-06T15:11:05-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 34168,
"slug": "guides-and-explainers",
"name": "Guides and Explainers"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12103028",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12103028/should-you-use-usps-to-mail-your-midterm-ballot-heres-what-california-election-officials-say",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003cp>County election officials this week began mailing ballots to every registered \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California\u003c/a> voter for the Nov. 3 midterm election, kicking off a monthlong vote-by-mail stretch — albeit one shadowed by a series of federal challenges to the system. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>President Donald Trump has kept up his attacks on mail voting this year, which he has claimed, without evidence, is rife with fraud. The administration’s efforts to drastically limit voting by mail have ranged from an \u003ca href=\"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/\">executive order \u003c/a>giving the United States Postal Service the unprecedented role of deciding who receives mail ballots to pushing Congress to require photo ID at the polls. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>So far, those moves have failed. But the USPS has also changed how some mail is collected — leaving many voters unsure whether the agency can reliably deliver their ballots this fall.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Keep reading for what we know about using USPS to mail your midterm ballot this election season. And remember: Aside from those USPS collection boxes, voters have several other options to submit their mail-in ballot, including using a secure county drop box or submitting by hand to any open voting location.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n\u003cli>\u003cstrong>Jump to: \u003ca href=\"#mail-in-ballot\">Should I mail my ballot through USPS?\u003c/a> \u003c/strong>\u003c/li>\n\u003c/ul>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What’s changed at USPS — and what does it mean for my ballot?\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Two changes to USPS in recent years have slowed down service in many regions, especially for voters in rural areas. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>First, starting in April 2025, USPS implemented what’s called its Regional Transportation Optimization (RTO) initiative nationwide. At post offices and collection boxes more than 50 miles from a processing center, the RTO means mail is now \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12085378/usps-changes-ballot-drop-box-near-me-deadline-california-primary-vote-for-governor\">picked up the next day\u003c/a> instead of the same day. Northern California has just two processing centers, in Richmond and Sacramento. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1999\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12103052\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/10/001_Oakland_ItzelDiazandFamily_09092021_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1999px) 100vw, 1999px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Porfirio Diaz fills out his mail-in ballot for California’s gubernatorial recall election at his home in Oakland on Sept. 9, 2021. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Second, in December 2025, USPS formally \u003ca href=\"https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/24/2025-20740/postmarks-and-postal-possession\">defined a postmark\u003c/a> as confirmation that the agency was in possession of the mail, but not necessarily the date it first \u003cem>received \u003c/em>the mail. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But what do these changes mean for your ballot arriving in time to be counted in the Nov. 3 election — which in California is \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail\">seven days after Election Day\u003c/a>, as long as it’s postmarked by or on Election Day? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>If you drop your ballot in a post office or box, it may not get a postmark until USPS picks it up, trucks it to a processing center and stamps it. That could be days later. Many voters assume they have until Election Day to mail a ballot, but if it’s postmarked \u003cem>after \u003c/em>Nov. 3, it will be rejected. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Because of mail processing facility shutdowns, our mail — including our election mail — takes a more circuitous route to get to the county elections office than it used to,” said Kim Alexander, president and founder of the non-partisan California Voter Foundation. “In some counties, the mail actually goes to a processing center in Nevada and then comes back to California.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In California, nearly 90% of voters cast their ballots by mail in the statewide June primary. And more ballots are now showing up too late to be counted in recent years. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In the 2026 primary, \u003ca href=\"https://www.ppic.org/publication/understanding-increases-in-late-vote-by-mail-ballots-in-california/\">1.1% of all California mail ballots\u003c/a> arrived late, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. That’s up from 0.7% in the 2025 special election and 0.3% in 2024. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I personally find it heartbreaking when I see those stacks of uncounted ballots sitting in election offices, because I know how much work goes into filling out a ballot,” Alexander said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The PPIC report found the increase in rejection rates was concentrated in areas affected by the RTO, even after accounting for other differences. But the report concluded that California’s overall rise in rejected ballots can’t be pinned wholly on the USPS changes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"mail-in-ballot\">So how \u003cem>do \u003c/em>election officials recommend I submit my mail-in ballot?\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In the last two statewide elections, Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Attorney General Rob Bonta urged any voters planning to use USPS to mail in their ballots \u003ca href=\"https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-and-secretary-state-weber-sacramento-vote-early-june\">at \u003cem>least \u003c/em>a week before Election Day\u003c/a> to account for those USPS changes. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>And if you’re mailing your midterm ballot on Election Day itself, Weber’s office is recommending you \u003ca href=\"https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail\">“get a hand-stamped postmark\u003c/a> from a postal employee inside a United States Post Office” rather than simply dropping it in a USPS collection box.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But some officials are going further and steering voters away from using USPS altogether. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12082088\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/05/003_KQED_SanFrancisco_Election2020_MailinBallot_10122020_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">A San Francisco official mail-in ballot for the Nov. 3, 2020 election. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We’re not really encouraging people to use the USPS to get their ballot here,” said Evelyn Mendez, Sonoma County’s registrar of voters. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Instead, Mendez tells voters to use county collection boxes, which skip the Postal Service. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“If they use one of our official ballot drop boxes, our team picks those ballots up every day and brings them right back here,” she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Mendez cited the uptick in late ballots in the June primary as the driving force behind her warning about USPS. Sonoma County rejected \u003ca href=\"https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/vbm-rejection-reason/2026/june-primary-2026.pdf\">1,598 ballots\u003c/a> for arriving late, accounting for 0.95% of vote-by-mail ballots returned in the county. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Ballot drop boxes are now open 24/7 through 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. Voters from anywhere in California can use them, even if they’re not registered in that county. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Mendez said voters who still want to use USPS should go inside the post office and request that hand stamp to ensure it’s postmarked on time. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Sometimes we’ll get ballots that have two different dates, and it’s because someone got it hand-stamped in the office and then it got stamped when it went through the process — but they’re still getting here late,” she said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Alexander’s top recommendation is to turn in your mail ballot at a voting site as an in-person ballot. The option, known as “Sign, Scan and Go” voting, allows voters to bring their mail ballot to a vote center and sign a roster under penalty of perjury — just as you would for in-person voting. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Newsom expanded the option this year after signing \u003ca href=\"https://www.gov.ca.gov/2026/09/19/governor-newsom-signs-new-laws-to-protect-california-elections-from-trump-interference/\">Senate Bill 1420\u003c/a> last month to raise awareness and access to this service.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Alexander said this approach sidesteps time-intensive \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082075/california-primary-elections-2026-faq-governors-race-vote-ballot-signature-how-to-correct-mistake\">signature verification\u003c/a> — since your signature only goes on your ballot’s envelope, and the envelope isn’t necessary with Sign, Scan and Go — and late-arrival ballot rejections. She said it also speeds up California’s vote count, which drew criticism after the June primary when it took nearly a week to settle the governor’s and Los Angeles mayor’s races.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Dropping off your ballot in person at a vote center like this “really solves a lot of challenges, and it’s a win-win for the voter and for the elections office,” she said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How can I track my ballot?\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>You can track your ballot through \u003ca href=\"https://california.ballottrax.net/voter/\">BallotTrax\u003c/a>, the state’s “Where’s My Ballot” site. The service sends alerts when your ballot is mailed, delivered and received by the county. Plus, you’ll be notified if the county flags an issue, such as a signature challenge. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“That allows you to get a jump on correcting those issues, so your ballot can be counted,” Alexander said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Where do Trump’s attacks on mail-in voting legally stand right now?\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In March, Trump issued \u003ca href=\"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/\">an executive order to restrict mail voting\u003c/a>. The order would have required USPS — an agency within the federal government — to send mail ballots only to voters on a federal list of “approved” voters. It also would have charged the Department of Justice with prosecuting election officials who issue ballots to ineligible voters. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>A federal judge \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/25/us/politics/trump-mail-in-voting-ruling.html\">issued a swift ruling\u003c/a> preventing USPS from implementing the order — which the Supreme Court then \u003ca href=\"https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/09/supreme-court-denies-trump-administrations-request-to-implement-parts-of-usps-rule-on-mail-in-vo/\">left in place\u003c/a> in September. However, a USPS \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/01/us/politics/whistle-blower-voting-by-mail.html\">whistleblower alleged\u003c/a> the agency secretly prepared to follow Trump’s order even as the matter was still being fought over in the courts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Alexander said USPS’ leaders showed they were “sympathetic to” strategies that would restrict mail voting, costing the agency trust even though the effort failed. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1920\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-scaled.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12095894\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-scaled.jpg 2560w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-2000x1500.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-160x120.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-1536x1152.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/GettyImages-1342327252-2048x1536.jpg 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2560px) 100vw, 2560px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Close-up of ballot drop box outside of polling place\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I think that has really shaken a lot of people’s confidence. I know it’s shaken mine,” she said. “Up until this election, I felt like the U.S. Postal Service was a reliable partner in the voting process.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The administration originally considered an even \u003ca href=\"https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-plan-to-restrict-mail-voting\">more disruptive restriction\u003c/a> on mail voting, according to new reporting from ProPublica. It would have required USPS to send all ballots by certified mail, meaning voters would have had to be home to sign for them in order to receive them. The Postal Service objected, and the White House ultimately backed down. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Additionally, the Supreme Court in July upheld a Mississippi state law that allows officials to count mail ballots postmarked by Election Day but received later. The Republican National Committee brought the case in 2024, arguing grace periods violate the Constitution. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>18 states and territories, including California, also permit grace periods to account for mail delays beyond voters’ control. In the 2024 general election, 373,116 ballots arrived within the grace period and were counted in California.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Thankfully, we avoided two potentially very harmful policy changes that would have dramatically impacted California voters,” Alexander said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Trump has also repeatedly pressed Congress to pass his SAVE America Act. The bill would ban mail voting except for illness, disability, military service or travel, in addition to requiring proof of citizenship during registration and photo ID at the polls. \u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12103028/should-you-use-usps-to-mail-your-midterm-ballot-heres-what-california-election-officials-say",
"authors": [
"11805"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_34168",
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_35796",
"news_32707",
"news_1386",
"news_18538",
"news_4750",
"news_36336",
"news_28639",
"news_35888",
"news_27626",
"news_34377",
"news_28404",
"news_28403",
"news_17968",
"news_831",
"news_36929"
],
"featImg": "news_12082113",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12102861": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12102861",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102861",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791284400000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "sf-has-the-fewest-kids-city-leaders-hope-these-policies-will-help-families-stick-around",
"title": "SF Has the Fewest Kids. City Leaders Hope These Policies Will Help Families Stick Around",
"publishDate": 1791284400,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "SF Has the Fewest Kids. City Leaders Hope These Policies Will Help Families Stick Around | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This story is part of How We Get By, a KQED series exploring how people are coping with rising costs in the Bay Area and California. Find the \u003c/em>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/affordability\">\u003cem>full series here\u003c/em>\u003c/a>\u003cem>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>After giving birth to her second child this Spring, Angelica Torres was able to take four months off work to care for herself and her baby.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>It’s a luxury not all working parents can afford, but Torres was able to take advantage of a San Francisco law, which offers parents full paychecks while they miss work to bond with a new child. That benefit, plus another city program that offers free childcare for her 3-year-old daughter, gave her welcome financial relief as she navigated the additional cost of growing her family, she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“With everything getting so expensive, I feel that San Francisco does a lot to support families,” she said. “This is why we’re still here.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>For at least a decade, San Francisco has had the fewest children of any major American city, with about 13% of residents under the age of 18 in 2025, according to U.S. Census data. The cost of raising a family has long been cited as one reason. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>As the artificial intelligence boom fuels economic growth and stirs anxiety about the costs of living rising even higher, local leaders are trying to help families stay in San Francisco by making life a little more affordable.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1999\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096525\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1999px) 100vw, 1999px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres and her children Valentina and Angel stand for a portrait in Torres’ mother’s home in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. Torres and her family stay with her mother for childcare assistance. (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“There’s a joke about San Francisco having more dogs than kids, and that’s a little funny, but a little sad,” said Supervisor Danny Sauter, who pushed to expand the city’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.sf.gov/information--paid-parental-leave-ordinance\">paid parental leave ordinance\u003c/a> to make it easier for workers to qualify. “It’s our responsibility at City Hall to look to see if we can remove barriers, if we could lend a hand.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Since the beginning of this year, the city has focused on alleviating some of the largest expenses families face. In January, Mayor Daniel Lurie rolled out his “Family Opportunity Agenda,” which included \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12094257/san-francisco-child-care-free-elfa-discount-subsidies-how-to-apply-who-qualifies\">expanding the city’s subsidized childcare\u003c/a> to include higher-income earners — a family of four making up to $324,000 a year can now qualify — as well as growing the city’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.sf.gov/news-mayor-lurie-expands-access-to-affordable-after-school-care-for-san-francisco-families-following-major-expansion-of-early-childcare\">after-school programs\u003c/a>. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Lurie is among a handful of mayors and state governors who’ve championed similar policies aimed at families, joining Delaware, Maine, Minnesota and Colorado in \u003ca href=\"https://www.parentoleave.com/blog/whats-changing-in-paid-family-leave-in-2026-your-complete-guide\">enacting or expanding paid parental leave\u003c/a> and New York City in rolling out \u003ca href=\"https://www.chalkbeat.org/newyork/2026/09/10/mamdani-2-k-program-launches-with-cost-savings-payment-delays/\">free childcare for 2-year-olds\u003c/a>. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Those efforts come as the child population is trending down nationwide due to falling birth and fertility rates, and major cities \u003ca href=\"https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026/vintage-2025-pop-estimates.html\">saw the biggest decline\u003c/a> in the past five years, according to Census data. Between 2010 and 2025, San Francisco’s under-18 population decreased numerically but \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/san-francisco-fewest-kids-data-21044908.php\">stayed relatively flat as a percentage of the overall population\u003c/a>. The portion of children under 5 had hovered around 4.5% between 2010 and 2020, but since the pandemic, it’s dropped to just under 4%.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c!-- iframe plugin v.4.3 wordpress.org/plugins/iframe/ -->\u003cbr />\n\u003ciframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"San Francisco's Under 18 and Under 5 Population\" aria-label=\"Area Chart\" id=\"datawrapper-chart-nMwbh\" src=\"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nMwbh/1/\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"0\" 0=\"style="width:\" 1=\"0;\" 2=\"min-width:\" 3=\"100%\" width=\"100%\" height=\"500\" class=\"iframe-class\">\u003c/iframe>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In speeches, Lurie and other city leaders echoed concerns about people delaying having children, if at all, or moving out of San Francisco after they have kids. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“This is the greatest city in the world, but it can’t be great if the people that are living here today can’t afford to stay here tomorrow,” Lurie told KQED in a recent interview. “We know how expensive this city is to raise a family, and so we’re doing everything in our power to build more affordable housing, to make early childhood care and education accessible to every family.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>City leaders are focusing on the early years because Census surveys show that’s when families are most likely to leave. It’s also the most expensive phase of life, when childcare prices can consume a big chunk of a family’s income.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“One of the things that’s been true in San Francisco is that if you have a child [under] 5, you’re more likely to leave,” said Ted Egan, the city’s chief economist. “But if you have a child who’s over 5, you’re not — which basically means once people are settled in school, they’re less mobile.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>San Francisco first began using city funds to offer free preschool for 4-year-olds in 2004 and two decades later broadened that program by using revenue from a voter-approved tax to offer free or discounted early education and care for families, based on their income. Lurie stops short of calling it universal childcare, but said he wants San Francisco to become the first major city in the country to provide “access to childcare” for every family with a child under 5.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The city was also a leader in offering fully paid parental leave, becoming the first in the nation to do so in 2017. The ordinance built on California’s \u003ca href=\"https://edd.ca.gov/en/disability/paid-family-leave/\">paid family leave program\u003c/a>, which offers new parents between 60 and 70 percent of their wages for eight weeks, by requiring employers to cover the rest of workers’ paychecks. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096522\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres holds her 5-month-old son Angel as her daughter Valentina works on a project for school in the kitchen of Torres’ mother’s home in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. Torres’ mother helps out with childcare for her and her family. (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11828551/who-benefits-from-san-franciscos-paid-leave-for-new-parents\">Studies have shown\u003c/a> that workers in industries with high turnover, like restaurants and hospitality, were least likely to opt in. A new update to the law makes employees who are starting a new job eligible for the benefit sooner — at 90 days, up from 180.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Torres said this change didn’t directly affect her, but she was glad to see her partner take time off his job as a restaurant cook to take care of their baby after she went back to work as a site supervisor at a preschool. It was a benefit he could have taken after their daughter was born, but didn’t, she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“He was like, ‘I cannot miss a lot of days of work. What is my boss going to say?’” Torres said. “This time around, I explained to him [he] could take some time off. It’s a law. He would go on walks with the baby and take care of our daughter. I feel like he was more connected to his children.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The subsidized childcare program, Early Learning For All, saves her more than $2,000 per month for her daughter’s full-time care, she said, and helps offset other rising costs. The program also boosts the pay of early childhood educators at its participating programs, including the preschool where Torres works, and that has increased her hourly wage from $28 to $36 per hour in the last few years. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>While she’s grateful for the help, Torres said her biggest expense is still the rent. The couple shares a four-bedroom apartment with Torres’ parents and brother in the Excelsior District, a working-class neighborhood in the southeastern part of the city. Since the pandemic, the rent stayed at $4,000 until a couple of months ago, when Torres said the landlord bumped it up by 10%.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>She said she hopes that city leaders “can target the bigger issues that people in San Francisco face like the rent.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Rent is really expensive. Super expensive,” she said. “I really love this city. I love the diversity, and I want my children to grow here.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">‘Hard to live here’ \u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In several interviews, parents of young children echoed Torres’ concern, praising the family-friendly policies but citing the high cost of housing, limited availability of family-sized apartments and an unpopular school lottery as reasons they may eventually leave.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096523\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres holds her 5-month-old son Angel in her mother’s kitchen in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“People who locked in their [mortgage or rental] rates during the pandemic are happy to stay, but those that want to move or want to expand out of their one-bedroom or two-bedroom apartments really do find it hard to live here,” said Vai Sundaresan, a tech worker who was laid off when she was pregnant with her 1-year-old daughter. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>She said one reason she and her husband, who also works in tech, can afford to live in San Francisco is that they bought their house four years ago. “But if we were to move now, it would be hard.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Sauter is keenly aware of this trend: In the 15 years he’s lived in San Francisco, he said he’s seen friends leave after they start a family. He became a dad himself more than a year ago and said he’s now getting a closer glimpse into the challenges of parenting in the city.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“It almost feels destined when you have a first child, or certainly a second child, that you just expect someone to move away,” Sauter said. “That’s not healthy for a city.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>To encourage developers to build larger, family-sized apartments, Sauter co-authored an incentive to allow developers to add another floor if they build apartments with two or more bedrooms. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The incentive is part of a state-mandated effort to address California’s housing shortage. The city’s proposal, which Lurie branded the “Family Zoning Plan,” was approved in December 2025 and allows for the construction of some 36,000 additional homes and apartments, largely in neighborhoods with access to public transit, parks, retail, and community facilities.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In addition to championing the rezoning amendment and expanded paid parental leave, Sauter is also looking to add more diaper-changing tables and lactation rooms in public spaces and improve transit access for families with young kids. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But for some families, a bigger issue is the public school system.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Hitomi Wada and EJ Macayan, a couple who own a small business in the Tenderloin District, said they’re grateful to save $3,000 per month in infant care under the city’s expanded Early Learning for All program but aren’t sure what they’ll do when their 1-year-old son reaches school age. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wada said she’s heard “nightmare stories” of navigating San Francisco Unified School District’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11641238/how-the-san-francisco-school-lottery-works-and-how-it-doesnt-2\">lottery\u003c/a> — a complicated assignment system intended to desegregate schools but one that has also led to long waitlists and confusion, leaving families anxious about whether they’ll get into their preferred school. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The district wants to overhaul the system but has \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082156/sfusd-wants-to-fix-its-lottery-system-then-look-again-at-closing-schools\">repeatedly delayed replacing it\u003c/a>, though officials said this year, 65% of families got into their top-ranked school. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“He’s only 15 months old, but we’re already thinking, ‘What is our strategy for navigating that portion?’ and trying to figure out what best fits us,” Wada said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Lurie’s hands are tied when it comes to resolving this problem: By law, an elected school board governs the district, which is funded by the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>He said the city does set aside around $100 million annually from its general fund to support public school libraries and the district’s arts, sports and college readiness programs. The city also increased access to free or discounted after-school care “to help bridge the gap between the time that school ends and parents are done with their job,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We have more work to do, but we’ve made some progress, especially on this early childhood [initiative],” Lurie said. “We’re going to lean in on transit; we’re going to lean in on building more affordable housing.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wada and Macayan said their heart is in San Francisco, but they’re not sure how long they can sustain their life in the city.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We do want to stay,” Wada said. “We want to make it work for as long as possible.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But as they look into the future, Wada said they’re already bracing themselves for what comes next: “When we do have to leave, where do we want to go?”\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This story is part of How We Get By, a KQED series exploring how people are coping with rising costs in the Bay Area and California. Find the \u003c/em>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/affordability\">\u003cem>full series here\u003c/em>\u003c/a>\u003cem>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This story is part of How We Get By, a KQED series exploring how people are coping with rising costs in the Bay Area and California. Find the \u003c/em>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/affordability\">\u003cem>full series here\u003c/em>\u003c/a>\u003cem>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>After giving birth to her second child this Spring, Angelica Torres was able to take four months off work to care for herself and her baby.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>After giving birth to her second child this Spring, Angelica Torres was able to take four months off work to care for herself and her baby.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>It’s a luxury not all working parents can afford, but Torres was able to take advantage of a San Francisco law, which offers parents full paychecks while they miss work to bond with a new child. That benefit, plus another city program that offers free childcare for her 3-year-old daughter, gave her welcome financial relief as she navigated the additional cost of growing her family, she said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>It’s a luxury not all working parents can afford, but Torres was able to take advantage of a San Francisco law, which offers parents full paychecks while they miss work to bond with a new child. That benefit, plus another city program that offers free childcare for her 3-year-old daughter, gave her welcome financial relief as she navigated the additional cost of growing her family, she said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“With everything getting so expensive, I feel that San Francisco does a lot to support families,” she said. “This is why we’re still here.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“With everything getting so expensive, I feel that San Francisco does a lot to support families,” she said. “This is why we’re still here.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>For at least a decade, San Francisco has had the fewest children of any major American city, with about 13% of residents under the age of 18 in 2025, according to U.S. Census data. The cost of raising a family has long been cited as one reason. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>For at least a decade, San Francisco has had the fewest children of any major American city, with about 13% of residents under the age of 18 in 2025, according to U.S. Census data. The cost of raising a family has long been cited as one reason. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>As the artificial intelligence boom fuels economic growth and stirs anxiety about the costs of living rising even higher, local leaders are trying to help families stay in San Francisco by making life a little more affordable.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>As the artificial intelligence boom fuels economic growth and stirs anxiety about the costs of living rising even higher, local leaders are trying to help families stay in San Francisco by making life a little more affordable.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12096525,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096525\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres and her children Valentina and Angel stand for a portrait in Torres’ mother’s home in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. Torres and her family stay with her mother for childcare assistance.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096525\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres and her children Valentina and Angel stand for a portrait in Torres’ mother’s home in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. Torres and her family stay with her mother for childcare assistance.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“There’s a joke about San Francisco having more dogs than kids, and that’s a little funny, but a little sad,” said Supervisor Danny Sauter, who pushed to expand the city’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.sf.gov/information--paid-parental-leave-ordinance\">paid parental leave ordinance\u003c/a> to make it easier for workers to qualify. “It’s our responsibility at City Hall to look to see if we can remove barriers, if we could lend a hand.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“There’s a joke about San Francisco having more dogs than kids, and that’s a little funny, but a little sad,” said Supervisor Danny Sauter, who pushed to expand the city’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.sf.gov/information--paid-parental-leave-ordinance\">paid parental leave ordinance\u003c/a> to make it easier for workers to qualify. “It’s our responsibility at City Hall to look to see if we can remove barriers, if we could lend a hand.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Since the beginning of this year, the city has focused on alleviating some of the largest expenses families face. In January, Mayor Daniel Lurie rolled out his “Family Opportunity Agenda,” which included \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12094257/san-francisco-child-care-free-elfa-discount-subsidies-how-to-apply-who-qualifies\">expanding the city’s subsidized childcare\u003c/a> to include higher-income earners — a family of four making up to $324,000 a year can now qualify — as well as growing the city’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.sf.gov/news-mayor-lurie-expands-access-to-affordable-after-school-care-for-san-francisco-families-following-major-expansion-of-early-childcare\">after-school programs\u003c/a>. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Since the beginning of this year, the city has focused on alleviating some of the largest expenses families face. In January, Mayor Daniel Lurie rolled out his “Family Opportunity Agenda,” which included \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12094257/san-francisco-child-care-free-elfa-discount-subsidies-how-to-apply-who-qualifies\">expanding the city’s subsidized childcare\u003c/a> to include higher-income earners — a family of four making up to $324,000 a year can now qualify — as well as growing the city’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.sf.gov/news-mayor-lurie-expands-access-to-affordable-after-school-care-for-san-francisco-families-following-major-expansion-of-early-childcare\">after-school programs\u003c/a>. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Lurie is among a handful of mayors and state governors who’ve championed similar policies aimed at families, joining Delaware, Maine, Minnesota and Colorado in \u003ca href=\"https://www.parentoleave.com/blog/whats-changing-in-paid-family-leave-in-2026-your-complete-guide\">enacting or expanding paid parental leave\u003c/a> and New York City in rolling out \u003ca href=\"https://www.chalkbeat.org/newyork/2026/09/10/mamdani-2-k-program-launches-with-cost-savings-payment-delays/\">free childcare for 2-year-olds\u003c/a>. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Lurie is among a handful of mayors and state governors who’ve championed similar policies aimed at families, joining Delaware, Maine, Minnesota and Colorado in \u003ca href=\"https://www.parentoleave.com/blog/whats-changing-in-paid-family-leave-in-2026-your-complete-guide\">enacting or expanding paid parental leave\u003c/a> and New York City in rolling out \u003ca href=\"https://www.chalkbeat.org/newyork/2026/09/10/mamdani-2-k-program-launches-with-cost-savings-payment-delays/\">free childcare for 2-year-olds\u003c/a>. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Those efforts come as the child population is trending down nationwide due to falling birth and fertility rates, and major cities \u003ca href=\"https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026/vintage-2025-pop-estimates.html\">saw the biggest decline\u003c/a> in the past five years, according to Census data. Between 2010 and 2025, San Francisco’s under-18 population decreased numerically but \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/san-francisco-fewest-kids-data-21044908.php\">stayed relatively flat as a percentage of the overall population\u003c/a>. The portion of children under 5 had hovered around 4.5% between 2010 and 2020, but since the pandemic, it’s dropped to just under 4%.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Those efforts come as the child population is trending down nationwide due to falling birth and fertility rates, and major cities \u003ca href=\"https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026/vintage-2025-pop-estimates.html\">saw the biggest decline\u003c/a> in the past five years, according to Census data. Between 2010 and 2025, San Francisco’s under-18 population decreased numerically but \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/san-francisco-fewest-kids-data-21044908.php\">stayed relatively flat as a percentage of the overall population\u003c/a>. The portion of children under 5 had hovered around 4.5% between 2010 and 2020, but since the pandemic, it’s dropped to just under 4%.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/shortcode",
"attrs": {
"0": "style=\"width:",
"1": "0;",
"2": "min-width:",
"3": "100%",
"shortcode_type": "self_closing",
"shortcode_name": "iframe",
"title": "San Francisco's Under 18 and Under 5 Population",
"aria-label": "Area Chart",
"id": "datawrapper-chart-nMwbh",
"src": "https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nMwbh/1/",
"scrolling": "no",
"frameborder": "0"
},
"innerHTML": "\n[iframe title=\"San Francisco's Under 18 and Under 5 Population\" aria-label=\"Area Chart\" id=\"datawrapper-chart-nMwbh\" src=\"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nMwbh/1/\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"0\" style=\"width: 0; min-width: 100%]\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n[iframe title=\"San Francisco's Under 18 and Under 5 Population\" aria-label=\"Area Chart\" id=\"datawrapper-chart-nMwbh\" src=\"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nMwbh/1/\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"0\" style=\"width: 0; min-width: 100%]\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In speeches, Lurie and other city leaders echoed concerns about people delaying having children, if at all, or moving out of San Francisco after they have kids. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In speeches, Lurie and other city leaders echoed concerns about people delaying having children, if at all, or moving out of San Francisco after they have kids. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“This is the greatest city in the world, but it can’t be great if the people that are living here today can’t afford to stay here tomorrow,” Lurie told KQED in a recent interview. “We know how expensive this city is to raise a family, and so we’re doing everything in our power to build more affordable housing, to make early childhood care and education accessible to every family.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“This is the greatest city in the world, but it can’t be great if the people that are living here today can’t afford to stay here tomorrow,” Lurie told KQED in a recent interview. “We know how expensive this city is to raise a family, and so we’re doing everything in our power to build more affordable housing, to make early childhood care and education accessible to every family.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>City leaders are focusing on the early years because Census surveys show that’s when families are most likely to leave. It’s also the most expensive phase of life, when childcare prices can consume a big chunk of a family’s income.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>City leaders are focusing on the early years because Census surveys show that’s when families are most likely to leave. It’s also the most expensive phase of life, when childcare prices can consume a big chunk of a family’s income.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“One of the things that’s been true in San Francisco is that if you have a child [under] 5, you’re more likely to leave,” said Ted Egan, the city’s chief economist. “But if you have a child who’s over 5, you’re not — which basically means once people are settled in school, they’re less mobile.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“One of the things that’s been true in San Francisco is that if you have a child [under] 5, you’re more likely to leave,” said Ted Egan, the city’s chief economist. “But if you have a child who’s over 5, you’re not — which basically means once people are settled in school, they’re less mobile.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>San Francisco first began using city funds to offer free preschool for 4-year-olds in 2004 and two decades later broadened that program by using revenue from a voter-approved tax to offer free or discounted early education and care for families, based on their income. Lurie stops short of calling it universal childcare, but said he wants San Francisco to become the first major city in the country to provide “access to childcare” for every family with a child under 5.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>San Francisco first began using city funds to offer free preschool for 4-year-olds in 2004 and two decades later broadened that program by using revenue from a voter-approved tax to offer free or discounted early education and care for families, based on their income. Lurie stops short of calling it universal childcare, but said he wants San Francisco to become the first major city in the country to provide “access to childcare” for every family with a child under 5.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The city was also a leader in offering fully paid parental leave, becoming the first in the nation to do so in 2017. The ordinance built on California’s \u003ca href=\"https://edd.ca.gov/en/disability/paid-family-leave/\">paid family leave program\u003c/a>, which offers new parents between 60 and 70 percent of their wages for eight weeks, by requiring employers to cover the rest of workers’ paychecks. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The city was also a leader in offering fully paid parental leave, becoming the first in the nation to do so in 2017. The ordinance built on California’s \u003ca href=\"https://edd.ca.gov/en/disability/paid-family-leave/\">paid family leave program\u003c/a>, which offers new parents between 60 and 70 percent of their wages for eight weeks, by requiring employers to cover the rest of workers’ paychecks. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12096522,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096522\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres holds her 5-month-old son Angel as her daughter Valentina works on a project for school in the kitchen of Torres’ mother’s home in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. Torres’ mother helps out with childcare for her and her family.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096522\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres holds her 5-month-old son Angel as her daughter Valentina works on a project for school in the kitchen of Torres’ mother’s home in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. Torres’ mother helps out with childcare for her and her family.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11828551/who-benefits-from-san-franciscos-paid-leave-for-new-parents\">Studies have shown\u003c/a> that workers in industries with high turnover, like restaurants and hospitality, were least likely to opt in. A new update to the law makes employees who are starting a new job eligible for the benefit sooner — at 90 days, up from 180.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11828551/who-benefits-from-san-franciscos-paid-leave-for-new-parents\">Studies have shown\u003c/a> that workers in industries with high turnover, like restaurants and hospitality, were least likely to opt in. A new update to the law makes employees who are starting a new job eligible for the benefit sooner — at 90 days, up from 180.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Torres said this change didn’t directly affect her, but she was glad to see her partner take time off his job as a restaurant cook to take care of their baby after she went back to work as a site supervisor at a preschool. It was a benefit he could have taken after their daughter was born, but didn’t, she said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Torres said this change didn’t directly affect her, but she was glad to see her partner take time off his job as a restaurant cook to take care of their baby after she went back to work as a site supervisor at a preschool. It was a benefit he could have taken after their daughter was born, but didn’t, she said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“He was like, ‘I cannot miss a lot of days of work. What is my boss going to say?’” Torres said. “This time around, I explained to him [he] could take some time off. It’s a law. He would go on walks with the baby and take care of our daughter. I feel like he was more connected to his children.” \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“He was like, ‘I cannot miss a lot of days of work. What is my boss going to say?’” Torres said. “This time around, I explained to him [he] could take some time off. It’s a law. He would go on walks with the baby and take care of our daughter. I feel like he was more connected to his children.” \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The subsidized childcare program, Early Learning For All, saves her more than $2,000 per month for her daughter’s full-time care, she said, and helps offset other rising costs. The program also boosts the pay of early childhood educators at its participating programs, including the preschool where Torres works, and that has increased her hourly wage from $28 to $36 per hour in the last few years. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The subsidized childcare program, Early Learning For All, saves her more than $2,000 per month for her daughter’s full-time care, she said, and helps offset other rising costs. The program also boosts the pay of early childhood educators at its participating programs, including the preschool where Torres works, and that has increased her hourly wage from $28 to $36 per hour in the last few years. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>While she’s grateful for the help, Torres said her biggest expense is still the rent. The couple shares a four-bedroom apartment with Torres’ parents and brother in the Excelsior District, a working-class neighborhood in the southeastern part of the city. Since the pandemic, the rent stayed at $4,000 until a couple of months ago, when Torres said the landlord bumped it up by 10%.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>While she’s grateful for the help, Torres said her biggest expense is still the rent. The couple shares a four-bedroom apartment with Torres’ parents and brother in the Excelsior District, a working-class neighborhood in the southeastern part of the city. Since the pandemic, the rent stayed at $4,000 until a couple of months ago, when Torres said the landlord bumped it up by 10%.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>She said she hopes that city leaders “can target the bigger issues that people in San Francisco face like the rent.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>She said she hopes that city leaders “can target the bigger issues that people in San Francisco face like the rent.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Rent is really expensive. Super expensive,” she said. “I really love this city. I love the diversity, and I want my children to grow here.” \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Rent is really expensive. Super expensive,” she said. “I really love this city. I love the diversity, and I want my children to grow here.” \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "‘Hard to live here’ ",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">‘Hard to live here’ \u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">‘Hard to live here’ \u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In several interviews, parents of young children echoed Torres’ concern, praising the family-friendly policies but citing the high cost of housing, limited availability of family-sized apartments and an unpopular school lottery as reasons they may eventually leave.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In several interviews, parents of young children echoed Torres’ concern, praising the family-friendly policies but citing the high cost of housing, limited availability of family-sized apartments and an unpopular school lottery as reasons they may eventually leave.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12096523,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096523\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres holds her 5-month-old son Angel in her mother’s kitchen in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096523\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres holds her 5-month-old son Angel in her mother’s kitchen in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“People who locked in their [mortgage or rental] rates during the pandemic are happy to stay, but those that want to move or want to expand out of their one-bedroom or two-bedroom apartments really do find it hard to live here,” said Vai Sundaresan, a tech worker who was laid off when she was pregnant with her 1-year-old daughter. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“People who locked in their [mortgage or rental] rates during the pandemic are happy to stay, but those that want to move or want to expand out of their one-bedroom or two-bedroom apartments really do find it hard to live here,” said Vai Sundaresan, a tech worker who was laid off when she was pregnant with her 1-year-old daughter. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>She said one reason she and her husband, who also works in tech, can afford to live in San Francisco is that they bought their house four years ago. “But if we were to move now, it would be hard.” \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>She said one reason she and her husband, who also works in tech, can afford to live in San Francisco is that they bought their house four years ago. “But if we were to move now, it would be hard.” \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Sauter is keenly aware of this trend: In the 15 years he’s lived in San Francisco, he said he’s seen friends leave after they start a family. He became a dad himself more than a year ago and said he’s now getting a closer glimpse into the challenges of parenting in the city.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Sauter is keenly aware of this trend: In the 15 years he’s lived in San Francisco, he said he’s seen friends leave after they start a family. He became a dad himself more than a year ago and said he’s now getting a closer glimpse into the challenges of parenting in the city.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“It almost feels destined when you have a first child, or certainly a second child, that you just expect someone to move away,” Sauter said. “That’s not healthy for a city.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“It almost feels destined when you have a first child, or certainly a second child, that you just expect someone to move away,” Sauter said. “That’s not healthy for a city.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>To encourage developers to build larger, family-sized apartments, Sauter co-authored an incentive to allow developers to add another floor if they build apartments with two or more bedrooms. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>To encourage developers to build larger, family-sized apartments, Sauter co-authored an incentive to allow developers to add another floor if they build apartments with two or more bedrooms. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The incentive is part of a state-mandated effort to address California’s housing shortage. The city’s proposal, which Lurie branded the “Family Zoning Plan,” was approved in December 2025 and allows for the construction of some 36,000 additional homes and apartments, largely in neighborhoods with access to public transit, parks, retail, and community facilities.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The incentive is part of a state-mandated effort to address California’s housing shortage. The city’s proposal, which Lurie branded the “Family Zoning Plan,” was approved in December 2025 and allows for the construction of some 36,000 additional homes and apartments, largely in neighborhoods with access to public transit, parks, retail, and community facilities.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In addition to championing the rezoning amendment and expanded paid parental leave, Sauter is also looking to add more diaper-changing tables and lactation rooms in public spaces and improve transit access for families with young kids. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In addition to championing the rezoning amendment and expanded paid parental leave, Sauter is also looking to add more diaper-changing tables and lactation rooms in public spaces and improve transit access for families with young kids. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>But for some families, a bigger issue is the public school system.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>But for some families, a bigger issue is the public school system.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed-v2/related-articles",
"attrs": {
"postIds": [
"news_12094257"
],
"label": "Related Articles",
"maxPosts": 1,
"showImages": false,
"heroImage": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2030/05/018_KQED_EachOneTeachOneChildCare_04262023.jpg",
"query": "",
"labelWasCleared": false,
"heroImageAlt": "",
"heroImageLink": "",
"labelLink": "",
"alignment": "right",
"target": "_self",
"manualLinks": [],
"posts": []
},
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Hitomi Wada and EJ Macayan, a couple who own a small business in the Tenderloin District, said they’re grateful to save $3,000 per month in infant care under the city’s expanded Early Learning for All program but aren’t sure what they’ll do when their 1-year-old son reaches school age. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Hitomi Wada and EJ Macayan, a couple who own a small business in the Tenderloin District, said they’re grateful to save $3,000 per month in infant care under the city’s expanded Early Learning for All program but aren’t sure what they’ll do when their 1-year-old son reaches school age. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Wada said she’s heard “nightmare stories” of navigating San Francisco Unified School District’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11641238/how-the-san-francisco-school-lottery-works-and-how-it-doesnt-2\">lottery\u003c/a> — a complicated assignment system intended to desegregate schools but one that has also led to long waitlists and confusion, leaving families anxious about whether they’ll get into their preferred school. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Wada said she’s heard “nightmare stories” of navigating San Francisco Unified School District’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11641238/how-the-san-francisco-school-lottery-works-and-how-it-doesnt-2\">lottery\u003c/a> — a complicated assignment system intended to desegregate schools but one that has also led to long waitlists and confusion, leaving families anxious about whether they’ll get into their preferred school. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The district wants to overhaul the system but has \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082156/sfusd-wants-to-fix-its-lottery-system-then-look-again-at-closing-schools\">repeatedly delayed replacing it\u003c/a>, though officials said this year, 65% of families got into their top-ranked school. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The district wants to overhaul the system but has \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082156/sfusd-wants-to-fix-its-lottery-system-then-look-again-at-closing-schools\">repeatedly delayed replacing it\u003c/a>, though officials said this year, 65% of families got into their top-ranked school. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“He’s only 15 months old, but we’re already thinking, ‘What is our strategy for navigating that portion?’ and trying to figure out what best fits us,” Wada said. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“He’s only 15 months old, but we’re already thinking, ‘What is our strategy for navigating that portion?’ and trying to figure out what best fits us,” Wada said. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Lurie’s hands are tied when it comes to resolving this problem: By law, an elected school board governs the district, which is funded by the state.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Lurie’s hands are tied when it comes to resolving this problem: By law, an elected school board governs the district, which is funded by the state.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>He said the city does set aside around $100 million annually from its general fund to support public school libraries and the district’s arts, sports and college readiness programs. The city also increased access to free or discounted after-school care “to help bridge the gap between the time that school ends and parents are done with their job,” he said.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>He said the city does set aside around $100 million annually from its general fund to support public school libraries and the district’s arts, sports and college readiness programs. The city also increased access to free or discounted after-school care “to help bridge the gap between the time that school ends and parents are done with their job,” he said.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“We have more work to do, but we’ve made some progress, especially on this early childhood [initiative],” Lurie said. “We’re going to lean in on transit; we’re going to lean in on building more affordable housing.” \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“We have more work to do, but we’ve made some progress, especially on this early childhood [initiative],” Lurie said. “We’re going to lean in on transit; we’re going to lean in on building more affordable housing.” \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Wada and Macayan said their heart is in San Francisco, but they’re not sure how long they can sustain their life in the city.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Wada and Macayan said their heart is in San Francisco, but they’re not sure how long they can sustain their life in the city.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“We do want to stay,” Wada said. “We want to make it work for as long as possible.” \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“We do want to stay,” Wada said. “We want to make it work for as long as possible.” \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>But as they look into the future, Wada said they’re already bracing themselves for what comes next: “When we do have to leave, where do we want to go?”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>But as they look into the future, Wada said they’re already bracing themselves for what comes next: “When we do have to leave, where do we want to go?”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "As the AI boom fuels economic growth and stirs anxiety about rising costs of living, local leaders are trying to make raising a family more affordable. ",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791244989,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": true,
"iframeSrcs": [
"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nMwbh/1/"
],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 43,
"wordCount": 2051
},
"headData": {
"title": "SF Has the Fewest Kids. City Leaders Hope These Policies Will Help Families Stick Around | KQED",
"description": "As the AI boom fuels economic growth and stirs anxiety about rising costs of living, local leaders are trying to make raising a family more affordable. ",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "SF Has the Fewest Kids. City Leaders Hope These Policies Will Help Families Stick Around",
"datePublished": "2026-10-06T04:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-05T17:03:09-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 13,
"slug": "politics",
"name": "Politics"
},
"audioUrl": "https://traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/0af137ef-751e-4b19-a055-aaef00d2d578/ffca7e9f-6831-41c5-bcaf-aaef00f5a073/a6405757-e296-4b35-b4ac-b4d40117cedb/audio.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12102861/sf-has-the-fewest-kids-city-leaders-hope-these-policies-will-help-families-stick-around",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003cp>\u003cem>This story is part of How We Get By, a KQED series exploring how people are coping with rising costs in the Bay Area and California. Find the \u003c/em>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/affordability\">\u003cem>full series here\u003c/em>\u003c/a>\u003cem>.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>After giving birth to her second child this Spring, Angelica Torres was able to take four months off work to care for herself and her baby.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>It’s a luxury not all working parents can afford, but Torres was able to take advantage of a San Francisco law, which offers parents full paychecks while they miss work to bond with a new child. That benefit, plus another city program that offers free childcare for her 3-year-old daughter, gave her welcome financial relief as she navigated the additional cost of growing her family, she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“With everything getting so expensive, I feel that San Francisco does a lot to support families,” she said. “This is why we’re still here.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>For at least a decade, San Francisco has had the fewest children of any major American city, with about 13% of residents under the age of 18 in 2025, according to U.S. Census data. The cost of raising a family has long been cited as one reason. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>As the artificial intelligence boom fuels economic growth and stirs anxiety about the costs of living rising even higher, local leaders are trying to help families stay in San Francisco by making life a little more affordable.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1999\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096525\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09.jpg 1999w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-09-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1999px) 100vw, 1999px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres and her children Valentina and Angel stand for a portrait in Torres’ mother’s home in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. Torres and her family stay with her mother for childcare assistance. (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“There’s a joke about San Francisco having more dogs than kids, and that’s a little funny, but a little sad,” said Supervisor Danny Sauter, who pushed to expand the city’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.sf.gov/information--paid-parental-leave-ordinance\">paid parental leave ordinance\u003c/a> to make it easier for workers to qualify. “It’s our responsibility at City Hall to look to see if we can remove barriers, if we could lend a hand.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Since the beginning of this year, the city has focused on alleviating some of the largest expenses families face. In January, Mayor Daniel Lurie rolled out his “Family Opportunity Agenda,” which included \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12094257/san-francisco-child-care-free-elfa-discount-subsidies-how-to-apply-who-qualifies\">expanding the city’s subsidized childcare\u003c/a> to include higher-income earners — a family of four making up to $324,000 a year can now qualify — as well as growing the city’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.sf.gov/news-mayor-lurie-expands-access-to-affordable-after-school-care-for-san-francisco-families-following-major-expansion-of-early-childcare\">after-school programs\u003c/a>. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Lurie is among a handful of mayors and state governors who’ve championed similar policies aimed at families, joining Delaware, Maine, Minnesota and Colorado in \u003ca href=\"https://www.parentoleave.com/blog/whats-changing-in-paid-family-leave-in-2026-your-complete-guide\">enacting or expanding paid parental leave\u003c/a> and New York City in rolling out \u003ca href=\"https://www.chalkbeat.org/newyork/2026/09/10/mamdani-2-k-program-launches-with-cost-savings-payment-delays/\">free childcare for 2-year-olds\u003c/a>. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Those efforts come as the child population is trending down nationwide due to falling birth and fertility rates, and major cities \u003ca href=\"https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026/vintage-2025-pop-estimates.html\">saw the biggest decline\u003c/a> in the past five years, according to Census data. Between 2010 and 2025, San Francisco’s under-18 population decreased numerically but \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/san-francisco-fewest-kids-data-21044908.php\">stayed relatively flat as a percentage of the overall population\u003c/a>. The portion of children under 5 had hovered around 4.5% between 2010 and 2020, but since the pandemic, it’s dropped to just under 4%.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c!-- iframe plugin v.4.3 wordpress.org/plugins/iframe/ -->\u003cbr />\n\u003ciframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"San Francisco's Under 18 and Under 5 Population\" aria-label=\"Area Chart\" id=\"datawrapper-chart-nMwbh\" src=\"https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nMwbh/1/\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"0\" 0=\"style="width:\" 1=\"0;\" 2=\"min-width:\" 3=\"100%\" width=\"100%\" height=\"500\" class=\"iframe-class\">\u003c/iframe>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In speeches, Lurie and other city leaders echoed concerns about people delaying having children, if at all, or moving out of San Francisco after they have kids. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“This is the greatest city in the world, but it can’t be great if the people that are living here today can’t afford to stay here tomorrow,” Lurie told KQED in a recent interview. “We know how expensive this city is to raise a family, and so we’re doing everything in our power to build more affordable housing, to make early childhood care and education accessible to every family.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>City leaders are focusing on the early years because Census surveys show that’s when families are most likely to leave. It’s also the most expensive phase of life, when childcare prices can consume a big chunk of a family’s income.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“One of the things that’s been true in San Francisco is that if you have a child [under] 5, you’re more likely to leave,” said Ted Egan, the city’s chief economist. “But if you have a child who’s over 5, you’re not — which basically means once people are settled in school, they’re less mobile.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>San Francisco first began using city funds to offer free preschool for 4-year-olds in 2004 and two decades later broadened that program by using revenue from a voter-approved tax to offer free or discounted early education and care for families, based on their income. Lurie stops short of calling it universal childcare, but said he wants San Francisco to become the first major city in the country to provide “access to childcare” for every family with a child under 5.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The city was also a leader in offering fully paid parental leave, becoming the first in the nation to do so in 2017. The ordinance built on California’s \u003ca href=\"https://edd.ca.gov/en/disability/paid-family-leave/\">paid family leave program\u003c/a>, which offers new parents between 60 and 70 percent of their wages for eight weeks, by requiring employers to cover the rest of workers’ paychecks. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096522\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-01-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres holds her 5-month-old son Angel as her daughter Valentina works on a project for school in the kitchen of Torres’ mother’s home in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. Torres’ mother helps out with childcare for her and her family. (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11828551/who-benefits-from-san-franciscos-paid-leave-for-new-parents\">Studies have shown\u003c/a> that workers in industries with high turnover, like restaurants and hospitality, were least likely to opt in. A new update to the law makes employees who are starting a new job eligible for the benefit sooner — at 90 days, up from 180.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Torres said this change didn’t directly affect her, but she was glad to see her partner take time off his job as a restaurant cook to take care of their baby after she went back to work as a site supervisor at a preschool. It was a benefit he could have taken after their daughter was born, but didn’t, she said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“He was like, ‘I cannot miss a lot of days of work. What is my boss going to say?’” Torres said. “This time around, I explained to him [he] could take some time off. It’s a law. He would go on walks with the baby and take care of our daughter. I feel like he was more connected to his children.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The subsidized childcare program, Early Learning For All, saves her more than $2,000 per month for her daughter’s full-time care, she said, and helps offset other rising costs. The program also boosts the pay of early childhood educators at its participating programs, including the preschool where Torres works, and that has increased her hourly wage from $28 to $36 per hour in the last few years. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>While she’s grateful for the help, Torres said her biggest expense is still the rent. The couple shares a four-bedroom apartment with Torres’ parents and brother in the Excelsior District, a working-class neighborhood in the southeastern part of the city. Since the pandemic, the rent stayed at $4,000 until a couple of months ago, when Torres said the landlord bumped it up by 10%.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>She said she hopes that city leaders “can target the bigger issues that people in San Francisco face like the rent.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Rent is really expensive. Super expensive,” she said. “I really love this city. I love the diversity, and I want my children to grow here.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">‘Hard to live here’ \u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In several interviews, parents of young children echoed Torres’ concern, praising the family-friendly policies but citing the high cost of housing, limited availability of family-sized apartments and an unpopular school lottery as reasons they may eventually leave.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12096523\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/08/260821-FamilyFriendlySF-JY-03-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Angelica Torres holds her 5-month-old son Angel in her mother’s kitchen in San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. (Juliana Yamada for KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“People who locked in their [mortgage or rental] rates during the pandemic are happy to stay, but those that want to move or want to expand out of their one-bedroom or two-bedroom apartments really do find it hard to live here,” said Vai Sundaresan, a tech worker who was laid off when she was pregnant with her 1-year-old daughter. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>She said one reason she and her husband, who also works in tech, can afford to live in San Francisco is that they bought their house four years ago. “But if we were to move now, it would be hard.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Sauter is keenly aware of this trend: In the 15 years he’s lived in San Francisco, he said he’s seen friends leave after they start a family. He became a dad himself more than a year ago and said he’s now getting a closer glimpse into the challenges of parenting in the city.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“It almost feels destined when you have a first child, or certainly a second child, that you just expect someone to move away,” Sauter said. “That’s not healthy for a city.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>To encourage developers to build larger, family-sized apartments, Sauter co-authored an incentive to allow developers to add another floor if they build apartments with two or more bedrooms. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The incentive is part of a state-mandated effort to address California’s housing shortage. The city’s proposal, which Lurie branded the “Family Zoning Plan,” was approved in December 2025 and allows for the construction of some 36,000 additional homes and apartments, largely in neighborhoods with access to public transit, parks, retail, and community facilities.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In addition to championing the rezoning amendment and expanded paid parental leave, Sauter is also looking to add more diaper-changing tables and lactation rooms in public spaces and improve transit access for families with young kids. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But for some families, a bigger issue is the public school system.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Hitomi Wada and EJ Macayan, a couple who own a small business in the Tenderloin District, said they’re grateful to save $3,000 per month in infant care under the city’s expanded Early Learning for All program but aren’t sure what they’ll do when their 1-year-old son reaches school age. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wada said she’s heard “nightmare stories” of navigating San Francisco Unified School District’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11641238/how-the-san-francisco-school-lottery-works-and-how-it-doesnt-2\">lottery\u003c/a> — a complicated assignment system intended to desegregate schools but one that has also led to long waitlists and confusion, leaving families anxious about whether they’ll get into their preferred school. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The district wants to overhaul the system but has \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12082156/sfusd-wants-to-fix-its-lottery-system-then-look-again-at-closing-schools\">repeatedly delayed replacing it\u003c/a>, though officials said this year, 65% of families got into their top-ranked school. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“He’s only 15 months old, but we’re already thinking, ‘What is our strategy for navigating that portion?’ and trying to figure out what best fits us,” Wada said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Lurie’s hands are tied when it comes to resolving this problem: By law, an elected school board governs the district, which is funded by the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>He said the city does set aside around $100 million annually from its general fund to support public school libraries and the district’s arts, sports and college readiness programs. The city also increased access to free or discounted after-school care “to help bridge the gap between the time that school ends and parents are done with their job,” he said.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We have more work to do, but we’ve made some progress, especially on this early childhood [initiative],” Lurie said. “We’re going to lean in on transit; we’re going to lean in on building more affordable housing.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Wada and Macayan said their heart is in San Francisco, but they’re not sure how long they can sustain their life in the city.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We do want to stay,” Wada said. “We want to make it work for as long as possible.” \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But as they look into the future, Wada said they’re already bracing themselves for what comes next: “When we do have to leave, where do we want to go?”\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12102861/sf-has-the-fewest-kids-city-leaders-hope-these-policies-will-help-families-stick-around",
"authors": [
"11829"
],
"categories": [
"news_1758",
"news_18540",
"news_6266",
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_26598",
"news_1386",
"news_20754",
"news_2043",
"news_34055",
"news_32102",
"news_32928",
"news_20013",
"news_27626",
"news_27208",
"news_38"
],
"featImg": "news_12096524",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12101418": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12101418",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101418",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791281100000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-42-bans-new-state-taxes-on-personal-property",
"title": "Prop 42: Bans New State Taxes on Personal Property and Investments",
"publishDate": 1791281100,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 42: Bans New State Taxes on Personal Property and Investments | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Really wealthy people in America don’t just earn a regular paycheck and chuck those earnings into a savings account. Most of their net worth is tied up in assets like stocks and bonds.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>These assets are worth whatever the market says they’re worth on any given day. And if they increase in value…current law says that growth isn’t taxed while it sits there—it only gets taxed when an asset is actually sold.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Because the wealthy hold most of their fortunes as these paper assets, much of their growing wealth goes untaxed year after year. Is that a problem to fix? Or an essential part of the economy that keeps businesses humming?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> How we tax \u003cem>wealth\u003c/em> is exactly what’s under discussion in Prop 42. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over:\u003c/strong> Prohibits new state personal property taxes and certain retroactive state taxes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We are back with another edition of Prop Fest … where our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Today, we’re going through Proposition 42, which aims to prevent a wealth tax. Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. Big picture. What is Prop 42 about?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Property too has to do with what taxes you pay on sort of what you own in California. This is specifically targeting monetary assets. So think about like you pay personal taxes on things like your car, right? Car registration is a type of tax. Part of that bill is based on the value of your car. You might pay property taxes, for example, right. But there are other types of personal property that aren’t taxed right now. And one big example is financial assets like stocks or investment accounts. So you’re not taxed on your retirement account just for having one, right? You get taxed that money when you take it out to spend it. People with stock portfolios are not tax on that either until they try to remove the money and you pay capital gains on whatever the increase has been. So, the investments themselves, though, are not taxed right now. Prop 42 wants to codify the status quo in the Constitution in California, basically by saying you cannot tax monetary assets. And it also does a second thing, which is what opponents say is the real reason it’s on the ballot, is it would prevent California from enacting any kind of new wealth tax on its citizens. Prop 40, of course, that billionaire tax that’s on ballot as well. Is exactly that. It’s a tax on people’s overall wealth, regardless of sort of where it sits.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So this is a clap back to Prop 40, the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. This is one of two ballot measures actually before voters on this ballot that really seeks to undercut or potentially nullify altogether that proposed wealth tax on billionaires. So if Prop 41 or Prop 42 passes with more votes, they could essentially prevent the state from collecting the billionaire tax, even if that also passes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Prop 42 isn’t just about billionaires. It bans new taxes on all wealth, and that includes stock portfolios, IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, stuff that a lot of everyday Californians have.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> That’s right. And I think that’s what you’re going to be hearing from Prop 42 proponents is that this isn’t about billionaires. This is about your retirement account and, you know, protecting it. You know, I will say right now, we don’t, you know, there’s no serious proposals out there that I’ve seen to do something like this. Although when I talked to proponents, they did, you know, mention that there have been some attempts in the legislature, at least introductions of, you know, potential laws that would tax some assets. So. It’s not a totally like out there idea, but I think it’s hard to see this as only about, you know, that issue and all of our 401Ks when you would really have to climb a lot of hurdles in order to get a sort of tax on assets passed as it stands right now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So, aside from Prop 40, if you kind of put that to the side and just think about how California or the federal government do tax people in America. The income tax is primarily how things are done. But if we did want to raise taxes on high earners, super high earners, these billionaires, is there even a way to do it that isn’t through a wealth tax that looks at not liquid funds?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> I don’t think so, because that’s how these folks have built their wealth. Once you get to that level of wealth, it’s largely because you got stock options from the company that you founded or invested in. And then because of the tax code we have, there’s no incentive to sell that. There’s an incentive not to sell it, right? And so I think that these, that is why we’re seeing something like this billionaire We’ve created a tax code that makes it very easy to avoid paying high taxes if you have this much money. And a lot of the ways that, you know, people sort of go about managing their wealth are with the intention of avoiding taxes that you would otherwise face.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re going to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 42. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, we’re back with Marisa Lagos talking about Proposition 42. Marisa, who is supporting this measure that makes it harder to tax wealth here in California, and why?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So it’s really the same people that are supporting Prop 41 and that oppose Prop 40, the billionaire tax. Building a Better California, which is a PAC that was created by Sergey Brin and others, is funding the campaigns for this measure. They’ve raised almost $50 million to try to get Prop 42 over the finish line. So I sat down with Josh Rauh. He’s a Stanford University finance professor. He’s senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. And he thinks that leaving the door open for a wealth tax could cost the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Josh Rauh: \u003c/strong>We’re driving people away. We’re doing with the income taxes, and we’re doing it with this with the proposed wealth taxes So we would have to look for for for other measures economics is pretty clear about what some of the more efficient types of taxes are some of these have to do with consumption taxes meaning taxes on sales, which if you want to Make them progressive could be targeted towards luxury goods\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And there are some groups who are supporting this one who I wasn’t expecting, like California Professional Firefighters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. Why are some of those folks supporting 42?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I mean, what they would say is that they want to protect their retirement accounts, their pensions. You know, one of the trade offs you make being a public servant is often you might make a lower wage than you would in the private sector, but you have good retirement benefits. You have a decent sized pension fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is fighting this and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so SEIU, United Health Care Workers West is the biggest opposition. They’re the ones that wrote Prop 40, the billionaire tax, and they are obviously invested in ensuring not only that it passes, but that these competing measures do not undercut it. So they’re really using the Prop 40 campaign to also campaign against Prop 41 and Prop 42. And, you know, they say that this is not really about protecting average people’s retirement, that this essentially just a red herring to get normal California voters to vote for something that would nullify the wealth tax, the billionaire tax, and that, you know, that they’re essentially just using this threat of taxing your retirement account in order to convince you to do so. I spoke with Emanuel Sayez. He’s a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He actually helped craft Prop 40, the wealth tax proposal. And he thinks that these concerns about taxing all of our 401Ks are way overblown. He points out the legislature has had the ability to do that, to enact a wealth tax for decades and has never done so.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Emanuel Saez:\u003c/strong> It’s almost impossible to imagine that they would, by themselves, you know, increase one’s taxes. They are too scared of increasing taxes. Taxes in California are now increased almost suddenly through ballot initiatives.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>And that’s true. We rarely see the legislature and governor back tax increases. Most of the time, if they do, it’s to put it on the ballot in front of voters. I think the other thing to point out here is that even if this ballot measure passes, you can still go back to the voters and overturn it. So the idea that this is like putting your retirement in a lockbox and there will never be another attempt to do it, not totally true. You can always go back the voters and change things regardless of, you know, what they voted on before. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now when it comes to campaign spending. What are we seeing on 42?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Well, the Yes on 42 side has raised and spent most of almost the 50 million dollars in their account. But we’re also seeing some crossover spending. As I said, building a better California, which is that PAC funded by the billionaires, is donating in all three campaigns. They’re putting money against Prop 40 through that PAC. They’re funding money for Props 41 and 42. And I would expect to see Building A Better California to continue. To contribute to the Yes on 42 campaign.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Music starts\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters will be thinking about 40, 41, and 42? Do you think they’re always going to be connecting one to the other? Or could people be, you know, for or against the billionaire attacks and then find something they either like or don’t like in 41 or 42? How connected truly are these?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The intention of the folks who wrote 41 and 42 is to not talk about the connection to the billionaire tax. They want to just promote what they see as good government measures, and they thought that this was the most politically expedient way to make an argument in a year where billionaires are not super popular, that essentially you don’t have to talk about Prop 40. You can just talk about these. I think on the other side, you’re going to see these labor unions really try to yoke all three measures in voters’ minds in order to ensure that if you support the billionaire tax, you don’t then take a second or third vote that undercuts it. But I think that that is sort of an open question. And given the uneven amount of money, how much more money you have to fight the billionaire tax from the billionaires, it’s going to be a challenge for the labor unions and others to make that case.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Thank you. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 42 means you want no new taxes on investment accounts or personal assets. You also want no retroactive state taxes on paper assets. A no vote means that things stay as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter, feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are gonna be dropping breakdowns of all of the statewide propositions on your ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>PrepFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by and me, Olivia Ellen Price.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, and Ethan Tovin-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:12:38] And the whole KQED family. You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you appreciate the work that we’re doing here on PropFest, please consider becoming a sustaining member of KQEd. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. And I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 43, which would raise the threshold for special tax measures. We’ll see you then.\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Episode Transcript:",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Really wealthy people in America don’t just earn a regular paycheck and chuck those earnings into a savings account. Most of their net worth is tied up in assets like stocks and bonds.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Really wealthy people in America don’t just earn a regular paycheck and chuck those earnings into a savings account. Most of their net worth is tied up in assets like stocks and bonds.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>These assets are worth whatever the market says they’re worth on any given day. And if they increase in value…current law says that growth isn’t taxed while it sits there—it only gets taxed when an asset is actually sold.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>These assets are worth whatever the market says they’re worth on any given day. And if they increase in value…current law says that growth isn’t taxed while it sits there—it only gets taxed when an asset is actually sold.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Because the wealthy hold most of their fortunes as these paper assets, much of their growing wealth goes untaxed year after year. Is that a problem to fix? Or an essential part of the economy that keeps businesses humming?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Because the wealthy hold most of their fortunes as these paper assets, much of their growing wealth goes untaxed year after year. Is that a problem to fix? Or an essential part of the economy that keeps businesses humming?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> How we tax \u003cem>wealth\u003c/em> is exactly what’s under discussion in Prop 42. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> How we tax \u003cem>wealth\u003c/em> is exactly what’s under discussion in Prop 42. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over:\u003c/strong> Prohibits new state personal property taxes and certain retroactive state taxes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over:\u003c/strong> Prohibits new state personal property taxes and certain retroactive state taxes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We are back with another edition of Prop Fest … where our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We are back with another edition of Prop Fest … where our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Today, we’re going through Proposition 42, which aims to prevent a wealth tax. Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. Big picture. What is Prop 42 about?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Today, we’re going through Proposition 42, which aims to prevent a wealth tax. Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. Big picture. What is Prop 42 about?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Property too has to do with what taxes you pay on sort of what you own in California. This is specifically targeting monetary assets. So think about like you pay personal taxes on things like your car, right? Car registration is a type of tax. Part of that bill is based on the value of your car. You might pay property taxes, for example, right. But there are other types of personal property that aren’t taxed right now. And one big example is financial assets like stocks or investment accounts. So you’re not taxed on your retirement account just for having one, right? You get taxed that money when you take it out to spend it. People with stock portfolios are not tax on that either until they try to remove the money and you pay capital gains on whatever the increase has been. So, the investments themselves, though, are not taxed right now. Prop 42 wants to codify the status quo in the Constitution in California, basically by saying you cannot tax monetary assets. And it also does a second thing, which is what opponents say is the real reason it’s on the ballot, is it would prevent California from enacting any kind of new wealth tax on its citizens. Prop 40, of course, that billionaire tax that’s on ballot as well. Is exactly that. It’s a tax on people’s overall wealth, regardless of sort of where it sits.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Property too has to do with what taxes you pay on sort of what you own in California. This is specifically targeting monetary assets. So think about like you pay personal taxes on things like your car, right? Car registration is a type of tax. Part of that bill is based on the value of your car. You might pay property taxes, for example, right. But there are other types of personal property that aren’t taxed right now. And one big example is financial assets like stocks or investment accounts. So you’re not taxed on your retirement account just for having one, right? You get taxed that money when you take it out to spend it. People with stock portfolios are not tax on that either until they try to remove the money and you pay capital gains on whatever the increase has been. So, the investments themselves, though, are not taxed right now. Prop 42 wants to codify the status quo in the Constitution in California, basically by saying you cannot tax monetary assets. And it also does a second thing, which is what opponents say is the real reason it’s on the ballot, is it would prevent California from enacting any kind of new wealth tax on its citizens. Prop 40, of course, that billionaire tax that’s on ballot as well. Is exactly that. It’s a tax on people’s overall wealth, regardless of sort of where it sits.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So this is a clap back to Prop 40, the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So this is a clap back to Prop 40, the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. This is one of two ballot measures actually before voters on this ballot that really seeks to undercut or potentially nullify altogether that proposed wealth tax on billionaires. So if Prop 41 or Prop 42 passes with more votes, they could essentially prevent the state from collecting the billionaire tax, even if that also passes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. This is one of two ballot measures actually before voters on this ballot that really seeks to undercut or potentially nullify altogether that proposed wealth tax on billionaires. So if Prop 41 or Prop 42 passes with more votes, they could essentially prevent the state from collecting the billionaire tax, even if that also passes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Prop 42 isn’t just about billionaires. It bans new taxes on all wealth, and that includes stock portfolios, IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, stuff that a lot of everyday Californians have.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Prop 42 isn’t just about billionaires. It bans new taxes on all wealth, and that includes stock portfolios, IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, stuff that a lot of everyday Californians have.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> That’s right. And I think that’s what you’re going to be hearing from Prop 42 proponents is that this isn’t about billionaires. This is about your retirement account and, you know, protecting it. You know, I will say right now, we don’t, you know, there’s no serious proposals out there that I’ve seen to do something like this. Although when I talked to proponents, they did, you know, mention that there have been some attempts in the legislature, at least introductions of, you know, potential laws that would tax some assets. So. It’s not a totally like out there idea, but I think it’s hard to see this as only about, you know, that issue and all of our 401Ks when you would really have to climb a lot of hurdles in order to get a sort of tax on assets passed as it stands right now.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> That’s right. And I think that’s what you’re going to be hearing from Prop 42 proponents is that this isn’t about billionaires. This is about your retirement account and, you know, protecting it. You know, I will say right now, we don’t, you know, there’s no serious proposals out there that I’ve seen to do something like this. Although when I talked to proponents, they did, you know, mention that there have been some attempts in the legislature, at least introductions of, you know, potential laws that would tax some assets. So. It’s not a totally like out there idea, but I think it’s hard to see this as only about, you know, that issue and all of our 401Ks when you would really have to climb a lot of hurdles in order to get a sort of tax on assets passed as it stands right now.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So, aside from Prop 40, if you kind of put that to the side and just think about how California or the federal government do tax people in America. The income tax is primarily how things are done. But if we did want to raise taxes on high earners, super high earners, these billionaires, is there even a way to do it that isn’t through a wealth tax that looks at not liquid funds?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So, aside from Prop 40, if you kind of put that to the side and just think about how California or the federal government do tax people in America. The income tax is primarily how things are done. But if we did want to raise taxes on high earners, super high earners, these billionaires, is there even a way to do it that isn’t through a wealth tax that looks at not liquid funds?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> I don’t think so, because that’s how these folks have built their wealth. Once you get to that level of wealth, it’s largely because you got stock options from the company that you founded or invested in. And then because of the tax code we have, there’s no incentive to sell that. There’s an incentive not to sell it, right? And so I think that these, that is why we’re seeing something like this billionaire We’ve created a tax code that makes it very easy to avoid paying high taxes if you have this much money. And a lot of the ways that, you know, people sort of go about managing their wealth are with the intention of avoiding taxes that you would otherwise face.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> I don’t think so, because that’s how these folks have built their wealth. Once you get to that level of wealth, it’s largely because you got stock options from the company that you founded or invested in. And then because of the tax code we have, there’s no incentive to sell that. There’s an incentive not to sell it, right? And so I think that these, that is why we’re seeing something like this billionaire We’ve created a tax code that makes it very easy to avoid paying high taxes if you have this much money. And a lot of the ways that, you know, people sort of go about managing their wealth are with the intention of avoiding taxes that you would otherwise face.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re going to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 42. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re going to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 42. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, we’re back with Marisa Lagos talking about Proposition 42. Marisa, who is supporting this measure that makes it harder to tax wealth here in California, and why?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, we’re back with Marisa Lagos talking about Proposition 42. Marisa, who is supporting this measure that makes it harder to tax wealth here in California, and why?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So it’s really the same people that are supporting Prop 41 and that oppose Prop 40, the billionaire tax. Building a Better California, which is a PAC that was created by Sergey Brin and others, is funding the campaigns for this measure. They’ve raised almost $50 million to try to get Prop 42 over the finish line. So I sat down with Josh Rauh. He’s a Stanford University finance professor. He’s senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. And he thinks that leaving the door open for a wealth tax could cost the state.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So it’s really the same people that are supporting Prop 41 and that oppose Prop 40, the billionaire tax. Building a Better California, which is a PAC that was created by Sergey Brin and others, is funding the campaigns for this measure. They’ve raised almost $50 million to try to get Prop 42 over the finish line. So I sat down with Josh Rauh. He’s a Stanford University finance professor. He’s senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. And he thinks that leaving the door open for a wealth tax could cost the state.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Josh Rauh: \u003c/strong>We’re driving people away. We’re doing with the income taxes, and we’re doing it with this with the proposed wealth taxes So we would have to look for for for other measures economics is pretty clear about what some of the more efficient types of taxes are some of these have to do with consumption taxes meaning taxes on sales, which if you want to Make them progressive could be targeted towards luxury goods\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Josh Rauh: \u003c/strong>We’re driving people away. We’re doing with the income taxes, and we’re doing it with this with the proposed wealth taxes So we would have to look for for for other measures economics is pretty clear about what some of the more efficient types of taxes are some of these have to do with consumption taxes meaning taxes on sales, which if you want to Make them progressive could be targeted towards luxury goods\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And there are some groups who are supporting this one who I wasn’t expecting, like California Professional Firefighters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. Why are some of those folks supporting 42?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And there are some groups who are supporting this one who I wasn’t expecting, like California Professional Firefighters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. Why are some of those folks supporting 42?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I mean, what they would say is that they want to protect their retirement accounts, their pensions. You know, one of the trade offs you make being a public servant is often you might make a lower wage than you would in the private sector, but you have good retirement benefits. You have a decent sized pension fund.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I mean, what they would say is that they want to protect their retirement accounts, their pensions. You know, one of the trade offs you make being a public servant is often you might make a lower wage than you would in the private sector, but you have good retirement benefits. You have a decent sized pension fund.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is fighting this and why? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is fighting this and why? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so SEIU, United Health Care Workers West is the biggest opposition. They’re the ones that wrote Prop 40, the billionaire tax, and they are obviously invested in ensuring not only that it passes, but that these competing measures do not undercut it. So they’re really using the Prop 40 campaign to also campaign against Prop 41 and Prop 42. And, you know, they say that this is not really about protecting average people’s retirement, that this essentially just a red herring to get normal California voters to vote for something that would nullify the wealth tax, the billionaire tax, and that, you know, that they’re essentially just using this threat of taxing your retirement account in order to convince you to do so. I spoke with Emanuel Sayez. He’s a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He actually helped craft Prop 40, the wealth tax proposal. And he thinks that these concerns about taxing all of our 401Ks are way overblown. He points out the legislature has had the ability to do that, to enact a wealth tax for decades and has never done so.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so SEIU, United Health Care Workers West is the biggest opposition. They’re the ones that wrote Prop 40, the billionaire tax, and they are obviously invested in ensuring not only that it passes, but that these competing measures do not undercut it. So they’re really using the Prop 40 campaign to also campaign against Prop 41 and Prop 42. And, you know, they say that this is not really about protecting average people’s retirement, that this essentially just a red herring to get normal California voters to vote for something that would nullify the wealth tax, the billionaire tax, and that, you know, that they’re essentially just using this threat of taxing your retirement account in order to convince you to do so. I spoke with Emanuel Sayez. He’s a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He actually helped craft Prop 40, the wealth tax proposal. And he thinks that these concerns about taxing all of our 401Ks are way overblown. He points out the legislature has had the ability to do that, to enact a wealth tax for decades and has never done so.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Emanuel Saez:\u003c/strong> It’s almost impossible to imagine that they would, by themselves, you know, increase one’s taxes. They are too scared of increasing taxes. Taxes in California are now increased almost suddenly through ballot initiatives.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Emanuel Saez:\u003c/strong> It’s almost impossible to imagine that they would, by themselves, you know, increase one’s taxes. They are too scared of increasing taxes. Taxes in California are now increased almost suddenly through ballot initiatives.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>And that’s true. We rarely see the legislature and governor back tax increases. Most of the time, if they do, it’s to put it on the ballot in front of voters. I think the other thing to point out here is that even if this ballot measure passes, you can still go back to the voters and overturn it. So the idea that this is like putting your retirement in a lockbox and there will never be another attempt to do it, not totally true. You can always go back the voters and change things regardless of, you know, what they voted on before. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>And that’s true. We rarely see the legislature and governor back tax increases. Most of the time, if they do, it’s to put it on the ballot in front of voters. I think the other thing to point out here is that even if this ballot measure passes, you can still go back to the voters and overturn it. So the idea that this is like putting your retirement in a lockbox and there will never be another attempt to do it, not totally true. You can always go back the voters and change things regardless of, you know, what they voted on before. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now when it comes to campaign spending. What are we seeing on 42?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now when it comes to campaign spending. What are we seeing on 42?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Well, the Yes on 42 side has raised and spent most of almost the 50 million dollars in their account. But we’re also seeing some crossover spending. As I said, building a better California, which is that PAC funded by the billionaires, is donating in all three campaigns. They’re putting money against Prop 40 through that PAC. They’re funding money for Props 41 and 42. And I would expect to see Building A Better California to continue. To contribute to the Yes on 42 campaign.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Well, the Yes on 42 side has raised and spent most of almost the 50 million dollars in their account. But we’re also seeing some crossover spending. As I said, building a better California, which is that PAC funded by the billionaires, is donating in all three campaigns. They’re putting money against Prop 40 through that PAC. They’re funding money for Props 41 and 42. And I would expect to see Building A Better California to continue. To contribute to the Yes on 42 campaign.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Music starts\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Music starts\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters will be thinking about 40, 41, and 42? Do you think they’re always going to be connecting one to the other? Or could people be, you know, for or against the billionaire attacks and then find something they either like or don’t like in 41 or 42? How connected truly are these?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters will be thinking about 40, 41, and 42? Do you think they’re always going to be connecting one to the other? Or could people be, you know, for or against the billionaire attacks and then find something they either like or don’t like in 41 or 42? How connected truly are these?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The intention of the folks who wrote 41 and 42 is to not talk about the connection to the billionaire tax. They want to just promote what they see as good government measures, and they thought that this was the most politically expedient way to make an argument in a year where billionaires are not super popular, that essentially you don’t have to talk about Prop 40. You can just talk about these. I think on the other side, you’re going to see these labor unions really try to yoke all three measures in voters’ minds in order to ensure that if you support the billionaire tax, you don’t then take a second or third vote that undercuts it. But I think that that is sort of an open question. And given the uneven amount of money, how much more money you have to fight the billionaire tax from the billionaires, it’s going to be a challenge for the labor unions and others to make that case.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The intention of the folks who wrote 41 and 42 is to not talk about the connection to the billionaire tax. They want to just promote what they see as good government measures, and they thought that this was the most politically expedient way to make an argument in a year where billionaires are not super popular, that essentially you don’t have to talk about Prop 40. You can just talk about these. I think on the other side, you’re going to see these labor unions really try to yoke all three measures in voters’ minds in order to ensure that if you support the billionaire tax, you don’t then take a second or third vote that undercuts it. But I think that that is sort of an open question. And given the uneven amount of money, how much more money you have to fight the billionaire tax from the billionaires, it’s going to be a challenge for the labor unions and others to make that case.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Thank you. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Thank you. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 42 means you want no new taxes on investment accounts or personal assets. You also want no retroactive state taxes on paper assets. A no vote means that things stay as they are now.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 42 means you want no new taxes on investment accounts or personal assets. You also want no retroactive state taxes on paper assets. A no vote means that things stay as they are now.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter, feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are gonna be dropping breakdowns of all of the statewide propositions on your ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter, feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are gonna be dropping breakdowns of all of the statewide propositions on your ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>PrepFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by and me, Olivia Ellen Price.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>PrepFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by and me, Olivia Ellen Price.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, and Ethan Tovin-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, and Ethan Tovin-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:12:38] And the whole KQED family. You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:12:38] And the whole KQED family. You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you appreciate the work that we’re doing here on PropFest, please consider becoming a sustaining member of KQEd. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. And I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 43, which would raise the threshold for special tax measures. We’ll see you then.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you appreciate the work that we’re doing here on PropFest, please consider becoming a sustaining member of KQEd. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. And I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 43, which would raise the threshold for special tax measures. We’ll see you then.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Proposition 42 seeks to ban new state taxes on personal property like retirement investments.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790720790,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 43,
"wordCount": 2413
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 42: Bans New State Taxes on Personal Property and Investments | KQED",
"description": "Proposition 42 seeks to ban new state taxes on personal property like retirement investments.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 42: Bans New State Taxes on Personal Property and Investments",
"datePublished": "2026-10-06T03:05:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-29T15:26:30-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 31795,
"slug": "california",
"name": "California"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/pdst.fm/e/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC9185457141.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12101418/prop-42-bans-new-state-taxes-on-personal-property",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript:\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Really wealthy people in America don’t just earn a regular paycheck and chuck those earnings into a savings account. Most of their net worth is tied up in assets like stocks and bonds.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>These assets are worth whatever the market says they’re worth on any given day. And if they increase in value…current law says that growth isn’t taxed while it sits there—it only gets taxed when an asset is actually sold.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price:\u003c/strong> Because the wealthy hold most of their fortunes as these paper assets, much of their growing wealth goes untaxed year after year. Is that a problem to fix? Or an essential part of the economy that keeps businesses humming?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra:\u003c/strong> How we tax \u003cem>wealth\u003c/em> is exactly what’s under discussion in Prop 42. Here’s how it reads on your ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over:\u003c/strong> Prohibits new state personal property taxes and certain retroactive state taxes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz-Gavarra, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Allen-Price, host of Bay Curious. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We are back with another edition of Prop Fest … where our teams at The Bay and Bay Curious break down each statewide proposition on the California ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Today, we’re going through Proposition 42, which aims to prevent a wealth tax. Here to walk us through it is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. Big picture. What is Prop 42 about?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> Property too has to do with what taxes you pay on sort of what you own in California. This is specifically targeting monetary assets. So think about like you pay personal taxes on things like your car, right? Car registration is a type of tax. Part of that bill is based on the value of your car. You might pay property taxes, for example, right. But there are other types of personal property that aren’t taxed right now. And one big example is financial assets like stocks or investment accounts. So you’re not taxed on your retirement account just for having one, right? You get taxed that money when you take it out to spend it. People with stock portfolios are not tax on that either until they try to remove the money and you pay capital gains on whatever the increase has been. So, the investments themselves, though, are not taxed right now. Prop 42 wants to codify the status quo in the Constitution in California, basically by saying you cannot tax monetary assets. And it also does a second thing, which is what opponents say is the real reason it’s on the ballot, is it would prevent California from enacting any kind of new wealth tax on its citizens. Prop 40, of course, that billionaire tax that’s on ballot as well. Is exactly that. It’s a tax on people’s overall wealth, regardless of sort of where it sits.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So this is a clap back to Prop 40, the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Absolutely. This is one of two ballot measures actually before voters on this ballot that really seeks to undercut or potentially nullify altogether that proposed wealth tax on billionaires. So if Prop 41 or Prop 42 passes with more votes, they could essentially prevent the state from collecting the billionaire tax, even if that also passes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>Prop 42 isn’t just about billionaires. It bans new taxes on all wealth, and that includes stock portfolios, IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, stuff that a lot of everyday Californians have.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> That’s right. And I think that’s what you’re going to be hearing from Prop 42 proponents is that this isn’t about billionaires. This is about your retirement account and, you know, protecting it. You know, I will say right now, we don’t, you know, there’s no serious proposals out there that I’ve seen to do something like this. Although when I talked to proponents, they did, you know, mention that there have been some attempts in the legislature, at least introductions of, you know, potential laws that would tax some assets. So. It’s not a totally like out there idea, but I think it’s hard to see this as only about, you know, that issue and all of our 401Ks when you would really have to climb a lot of hurdles in order to get a sort of tax on assets passed as it stands right now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So, aside from Prop 40, if you kind of put that to the side and just think about how California or the federal government do tax people in America. The income tax is primarily how things are done. But if we did want to raise taxes on high earners, super high earners, these billionaires, is there even a way to do it that isn’t through a wealth tax that looks at not liquid funds?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos:\u003c/strong> I don’t think so, because that’s how these folks have built their wealth. Once you get to that level of wealth, it’s largely because you got stock options from the company that you founded or invested in. And then because of the tax code we have, there’s no incentive to sell that. There’s an incentive not to sell it, right? And so I think that these, that is why we’re seeing something like this billionaire We’ve created a tax code that makes it very easy to avoid paying high taxes if you have this much money. And a lot of the ways that, you know, people sort of go about managing their wealth are with the intention of avoiding taxes that you would otherwise face.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’re going to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 42. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor messages\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>All right, we’re back with Marisa Lagos talking about Proposition 42. Marisa, who is supporting this measure that makes it harder to tax wealth here in California, and why?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>So it’s really the same people that are supporting Prop 41 and that oppose Prop 40, the billionaire tax. Building a Better California, which is a PAC that was created by Sergey Brin and others, is funding the campaigns for this measure. They’ve raised almost $50 million to try to get Prop 42 over the finish line. So I sat down with Josh Rauh. He’s a Stanford University finance professor. He’s senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. And he thinks that leaving the door open for a wealth tax could cost the state.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Josh Rauh: \u003c/strong>We’re driving people away. We’re doing with the income taxes, and we’re doing it with this with the proposed wealth taxes So we would have to look for for for other measures economics is pretty clear about what some of the more efficient types of taxes are some of these have to do with consumption taxes meaning taxes on sales, which if you want to Make them progressive could be targeted towards luxury goods\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And there are some groups who are supporting this one who I wasn’t expecting, like California Professional Firefighters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California. Why are some of those folks supporting 42?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I mean, what they would say is that they want to protect their retirement accounts, their pensions. You know, one of the trade offs you make being a public servant is often you might make a lower wage than you would in the private sector, but you have good retirement benefits. You have a decent sized pension fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is fighting this and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so SEIU, United Health Care Workers West is the biggest opposition. They’re the ones that wrote Prop 40, the billionaire tax, and they are obviously invested in ensuring not only that it passes, but that these competing measures do not undercut it. So they’re really using the Prop 40 campaign to also campaign against Prop 41 and Prop 42. And, you know, they say that this is not really about protecting average people’s retirement, that this essentially just a red herring to get normal California voters to vote for something that would nullify the wealth tax, the billionaire tax, and that, you know, that they’re essentially just using this threat of taxing your retirement account in order to convince you to do so. I spoke with Emanuel Sayez. He’s a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He actually helped craft Prop 40, the wealth tax proposal. And he thinks that these concerns about taxing all of our 401Ks are way overblown. He points out the legislature has had the ability to do that, to enact a wealth tax for decades and has never done so.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Emanuel Saez:\u003c/strong> It’s almost impossible to imagine that they would, by themselves, you know, increase one’s taxes. They are too scared of increasing taxes. Taxes in California are now increased almost suddenly through ballot initiatives.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>And that’s true. We rarely see the legislature and governor back tax increases. Most of the time, if they do, it’s to put it on the ballot in front of voters. I think the other thing to point out here is that even if this ballot measure passes, you can still go back to the voters and overturn it. So the idea that this is like putting your retirement in a lockbox and there will never be another attempt to do it, not totally true. You can always go back the voters and change things regardless of, you know, what they voted on before. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now when it comes to campaign spending. What are we seeing on 42?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Well, the Yes on 42 side has raised and spent most of almost the 50 million dollars in their account. But we’re also seeing some crossover spending. As I said, building a better California, which is that PAC funded by the billionaires, is donating in all three campaigns. They’re putting money against Prop 40 through that PAC. They’re funding money for Props 41 and 42. And I would expect to see Building A Better California to continue. To contribute to the Yes on 42 campaign.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Music starts\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters will be thinking about 40, 41, and 42? Do you think they’re always going to be connecting one to the other? Or could people be, you know, for or against the billionaire attacks and then find something they either like or don’t like in 41 or 42? How connected truly are these?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>The intention of the folks who wrote 41 and 42 is to not talk about the connection to the billionaire tax. They want to just promote what they see as good government measures, and they thought that this was the most politically expedient way to make an argument in a year where billionaires are not super popular, that essentially you don’t have to talk about Prop 40. You can just talk about these. I think on the other side, you’re going to see these labor unions really try to yoke all three measures in voters’ minds in order to ensure that if you support the billionaire tax, you don’t then take a second or third vote that undercuts it. But I think that that is sort of an open question. And given the uneven amount of money, how much more money you have to fight the billionaire tax from the billionaires, it’s going to be a challenge for the labor unions and others to make that case.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Thank you. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 42 means you want no new taxes on investment accounts or personal assets. You also want no retroactive state taxes on paper assets. A no vote means that things stay as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>(music)\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for our latest episode of PropFest. How we doing? How we feeling? Feeling smarter, feeling ready to vote? Well, there’s plenty more where that came from. From now until October 9th, the Bay and Bay Curious teams here at KQED are gonna be dropping breakdowns of all of the statewide propositions on your ballot this year to leave you feeling ready to vote this November. Stay locked in and make sure you’re subscribed to the Bay so you don’t miss out on the next ones.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>PrepFest is a collaboration between the Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. It’s produced by and me, Olivia Ellen Price.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, and Ethan Tovin-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>[00:12:38] And the whole KQED family. You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Our show is made in San Francisco at member-supported KQED. If you appreciate the work that we’re doing here on PropFest, please consider becoming a sustaining member of KQEd. We can’t do this work without you. Just go to donate.kqed.org slash podcasts. I’m Olivia Ellen Price. And I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 43, which would raise the threshold for special tax measures. We’ll see you then.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12101418/prop-42-bans-new-state-taxes-on-personal-property",
"authors": [
"234",
"3239",
"102"
],
"programs": [
"news_28779",
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_28645",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12101422",
"label": "source_news_12101418"
},
"news_12101275": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12101275",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12101275",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791280800000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "prop-41-requires-new-audits-of-special-tax-programs",
"title": "Prop 41: Requires New Audits of Special Tax Programs",
"publishDate": 1791280800,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "Prop 41: Requires New Audits of Special Tax Programs | KQED",
"labelTerm": {},
"content": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You’re going to see a lot about taxes on this year’s ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Yesterday we talked about Prop 40, which would be a one-time tax on billionaires. If you haven’t listened to that episode yet, I suggest you go give it a listen, because today we’re dropping episodes on Props 41 and 42. And both of those are related to Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now, Prop 41 would require more audits on the programs that are funded by special taxes. Is it good governance or red tape meant to make it harder to pass new taxes?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is how Prop 41 reads on your ballot, and just a warning, it’s pretty wonky.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prohibits new state taxes that exclude revenues from state spending limit. Requires audits for new state special taxes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious. You’re listening to PropFest, our special series that goes through the statewide propositions on your ballot. They can be so confusing and consequential. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll explain the ins and outs of each one in hopes that you feel confident in your vote, no matter which side you come down on.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Here to walk us through Prop 41 is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. So the language of Prop 41 sort of sounds like gobbledygook to some voters. And we will straighten that out pretty soon. But maybe before we dive into all those specifics of this ballot measure, give us some context about who put this on the ballot and why.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this was placed on the ballot, essentially by the billionaires who were opposing Prop 40. That’s the billionaire tax. And both Prop 41 and another measure, Prop 42, were written after the billionaire proposal was already out collecting signatures. So they were crafted really as an attempt to undercut that ballot measure. And so it’s kind of impossible to talk about them without talking about the billionaire tax and the billionaires who are trying to kill the tax. Got it. OK, helpful context. So now let’s get into what Prop 41 does. So Prop 41 has kind of three main provisions. The first one is it’s going to require ongoing audits of state programs that are funded by what’s called special taxes. So in California, when tax money comes in, most of it goes to the general fund. That is the main spending account that pays for K-12 schools and most of the things the state does. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But, sometimes that revenue has been sort of written into law as a special tax, and those are earmarked for specific programs. You can think of something like the gas tax, which, you know, funds roads and infrastructure. That is not money that goes into the general fund. This measure says that before voters even weigh in on a proposed special tax they need to have an audit of what the money would be spent on. And then it requires ongoing audits in the future if a tax is actually passed. And so it’s being framed by proponents as a good government measure, right? This gives more transparency. Why are we spending billions of dollars in state money and not knowing where it goes essentially? Prop 41 has two other important provisions, and these are the ones that would conflict with the billionaire tax and potentially nullify them. And they both have something to do with the GAN limit, otherwise known as the state spending limit. This was a law put in place by voters in the 1970s, and it puts a cap on how much revenue the state can spend every year. It essentially says that if state revenues grow too fast, you gotta give some of that money back to taxpayers. Some special taxes are excluded from that limit, including the gas tax example. So one of the provisions in Prop 41 says new special taxes would all be subject to the state’s spending limit. So you can imagine if the billionaire tax passes and we have $100 billion in new spending, that would really increase the state revenue, right? So then the other provision prohibits the state from enforcing taxes that are not subject to the spending limit, so. Basically, either of these things would undercut Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s dig in a little bit more on that first provision about the audits, because there is a state auditor whose job is to audit what are they doing, are these new audits necessary?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think opponents would say they’re not. You do have the ability of the legislature to request an audit of anything that they vote to. And yeah, we have an auditor who very regularly looks at state agencies and programs and spending and comes out with reports based on what the legislature has decided are the priorities.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We need to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 41. If PropFest is helping you out, let us know by supporting our work. Your donations help keep projects like PropFast going. Contribute at donate.kqed.org. And you can get some sweet podcast swag as a thank you gift.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor message\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back. We’re talking with KQED’s Marisa Lagos about Proposition 41, the tax audit prop. Marisa, let’s get into who supports and opposes this prop. First up, what does support look like?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This was crafted by the folks who are opposing Proposition 40. It’s been largely funded by the same billionaires who are opposing that, again, sort of led by Sergey Brin. But a lot of familiar names here. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Names like Larry Page, who, with Sergey Brin, co-founded Alphabet, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Larry Ellison of Oracle, Jensen Huang of NVIDIA, mostly a who’s who of Silicon Valley.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>but you also have folks like the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Taxpayers Association supporting this, and you know, these are groups that generally think that California spends too much money and have questions about whether it’s being properly spent. I mean, we’ve heard a lot of talk about this around homeless funding, right, in the governor’s race. Like, why are we spending billions of dollars and not addressing the underlying problem or making progress? So I think groups like the Chamber, the Cal Taxpayers Association, first of all, you know, just. Are pretty opposed to higher taxes and regulation, but also think that there would be some benefit in auditing all state spending, especially these special taxes, which, you know, arguably in some cases may not be getting sort of the scrutiny that they could. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is lining up against Prop 41 and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so the opponents are the same groups that are supporting Prop 40 that put the billionaire tax on the ballot. So SEIU, HW West, the State Democratic Party. The California Federation of Labor Unions, they see this really as an attempt to undercut, to nullify the billionaire tax proposal and that it’s not really as much about good government as it is about that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So if Prop 40 and 41 were both to pass, how does that play out?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>On which one gets more votes. If Prop 40 got more votes, then it would stand and the only provisions of Prop 41 I believe that would take effect would be, you know, the audits and the spending limit. It would affect future special taxes, not this one. If 41 got more vote than 40, it would make it sort of unenforceable because so many provisions in 41 conflict with 40 and under California law, if something is on the same ballot together and they’re in a certain way, whatever gets more votes is kind of the law of the land. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But in the past, I know that’s gone to a judge, ultimately, to decide. Is that what would happen here, too?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think regardless of whether any of these pass individually, I believe that there will be court challenges.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters are going to be thinking about this suite of three props, proposition 40, 41 and 42? Will they be connecting them all and voting in one direction, or could it go like we’ve seen in the past, where sometimes you get this mixed message from voters on sort of opposing props? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think that’s really gonna depend on how well the Yes on 40 campaign can draw a straight line between getting someone’s support and getting them to oppose these other measures. The billionaires and other folks who oppose the billionaire tax are not gonna wanna talk about Prop 40 when they talk about props 41 and 42. They wanna make these sort of just standalone good government measures. And so I think that’s sort of an outstanding question because you don’t have a traditional campaign against 41 and 40 too. Can the Yes on 40 folks really make clear in voters’ minds that these are all tied together, and even if you like some of the provisions of these other ballot measures, that by supporting them, you would essentially be casting another vote against the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>When it comes to campaign spending, what are we seeing here?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This one is very lopsided. We’ve seen the folks pushing Prop 41, yes on 41, raise more than 46 million so far. Most of that is coming from the same pack that is fighting the billionaire tax. It’s called Building a Better California. It was founded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires. And I think one thing that’s important to note is that We’re probably going to be seeing some crossover messaging. So a lot of the money being spent on the other ballot measures will also affect this one. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But sounds like really no spending on the no side.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>No, and I think what you’re seeing is really that these are sort of a combined campaign for the other side. The unions that are pushing the billionaire tax are also pushing back against 41 and 42, but there isn’t that same level of like an organized campaign against each of them, in part because these are good government measures that sound very good on their face. I think it’s not something that you have the same sort of coalition. Able to sort of raise money and stand up against the way you might in some other sort of more traditional fights between the business community and labor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It was my pleasure. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 41 would create new rules about auditing state programs that would receive revenue from special taxes. It would also make new special taxes part of the state’s spending limit. A vote no means things would stay the same as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. This series is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s produced by Erika Cruz Guevara, Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQD podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 42, which aims to make it harder to create a wealth tax in California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll get into all that tomorrow. See you then.\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/heading",
"attrs": {
"text": "Episode Transcript",
"level": 2
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You’re going to see a lot about taxes on this year’s ballot.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You’re going to see a lot about taxes on this year’s ballot.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Yesterday we talked about Prop 40, which would be a one-time tax on billionaires. If you haven’t listened to that episode yet, I suggest you go give it a listen, because today we’re dropping episodes on Props 41 and 42. And both of those are related to Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Yesterday we talked about Prop 40, which would be a one-time tax on billionaires. If you haven’t listened to that episode yet, I suggest you go give it a listen, because today we’re dropping episodes on Props 41 and 42. And both of those are related to Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now, Prop 41 would require more audits on the programs that are funded by special taxes. Is it good governance or red tape meant to make it harder to pass new taxes?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now, Prop 41 would require more audits on the programs that are funded by special taxes. Is it good governance or red tape meant to make it harder to pass new taxes?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is how Prop 41 reads on your ballot, and just a warning, it’s pretty wonky.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is how Prop 41 reads on your ballot, and just a warning, it’s pretty wonky.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prohibits new state taxes that exclude revenues from state spending limit. Requires audits for new state special taxes.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prohibits new state taxes that exclude revenues from state spending limit. Requires audits for new state special taxes.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious. You’re listening to PropFest, our special series that goes through the statewide propositions on your ballot. They can be so confusing and consequential. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious. You’re listening to PropFest, our special series that goes through the statewide propositions on your ballot. They can be so confusing and consequential. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll explain the ins and outs of each one in hopes that you feel confident in your vote, no matter which side you come down on.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll explain the ins and outs of each one in hopes that you feel confident in your vote, no matter which side you come down on.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Here to walk us through Prop 41 is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. So the language of Prop 41 sort of sounds like gobbledygook to some voters. And we will straighten that out pretty soon. But maybe before we dive into all those specifics of this ballot measure, give us some context about who put this on the ballot and why.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Here to walk us through Prop 41 is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. So the language of Prop 41 sort of sounds like gobbledygook to some voters. And we will straighten that out pretty soon. But maybe before we dive into all those specifics of this ballot measure, give us some context about who put this on the ballot and why.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this was placed on the ballot, essentially by the billionaires who were opposing Prop 40. That’s the billionaire tax. And both Prop 41 and another measure, Prop 42, were written after the billionaire proposal was already out collecting signatures. So they were crafted really as an attempt to undercut that ballot measure. And so it’s kind of impossible to talk about them without talking about the billionaire tax and the billionaires who are trying to kill the tax. Got it. OK, helpful context. So now let’s get into what Prop 41 does. So Prop 41 has kind of three main provisions. The first one is it’s going to require ongoing audits of state programs that are funded by what’s called special taxes. So in California, when tax money comes in, most of it goes to the general fund. That is the main spending account that pays for K-12 schools and most of the things the state does. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this was placed on the ballot, essentially by the billionaires who were opposing Prop 40. That’s the billionaire tax. And both Prop 41 and another measure, Prop 42, were written after the billionaire proposal was already out collecting signatures. So they were crafted really as an attempt to undercut that ballot measure. And so it’s kind of impossible to talk about them without talking about the billionaire tax and the billionaires who are trying to kill the tax. Got it. OK, helpful context. So now let’s get into what Prop 41 does. So Prop 41 has kind of three main provisions. The first one is it’s going to require ongoing audits of state programs that are funded by what’s called special taxes. So in California, when tax money comes in, most of it goes to the general fund. That is the main spending account that pays for K-12 schools and most of the things the state does. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>But, sometimes that revenue has been sort of written into law as a special tax, and those are earmarked for specific programs. You can think of something like the gas tax, which, you know, funds roads and infrastructure. That is not money that goes into the general fund. This measure says that before voters even weigh in on a proposed special tax they need to have an audit of what the money would be spent on. And then it requires ongoing audits in the future if a tax is actually passed. And so it’s being framed by proponents as a good government measure, right? This gives more transparency. Why are we spending billions of dollars in state money and not knowing where it goes essentially? Prop 41 has two other important provisions, and these are the ones that would conflict with the billionaire tax and potentially nullify them. And they both have something to do with the GAN limit, otherwise known as the state spending limit. This was a law put in place by voters in the 1970s, and it puts a cap on how much revenue the state can spend every year. It essentially says that if state revenues grow too fast, you gotta give some of that money back to taxpayers. Some special taxes are excluded from that limit, including the gas tax example. So one of the provisions in Prop 41 says new special taxes would all be subject to the state’s spending limit. So you can imagine if the billionaire tax passes and we have $100 billion in new spending, that would really increase the state revenue, right? So then the other provision prohibits the state from enforcing taxes that are not subject to the spending limit, so. Basically, either of these things would undercut Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>But, sometimes that revenue has been sort of written into law as a special tax, and those are earmarked for specific programs. You can think of something like the gas tax, which, you know, funds roads and infrastructure. That is not money that goes into the general fund. This measure says that before voters even weigh in on a proposed special tax they need to have an audit of what the money would be spent on. And then it requires ongoing audits in the future if a tax is actually passed. And so it’s being framed by proponents as a good government measure, right? This gives more transparency. Why are we spending billions of dollars in state money and not knowing where it goes essentially? Prop 41 has two other important provisions, and these are the ones that would conflict with the billionaire tax and potentially nullify them. And they both have something to do with the GAN limit, otherwise known as the state spending limit. This was a law put in place by voters in the 1970s, and it puts a cap on how much revenue the state can spend every year. It essentially says that if state revenues grow too fast, you gotta give some of that money back to taxpayers. Some special taxes are excluded from that limit, including the gas tax example. So one of the provisions in Prop 41 says new special taxes would all be subject to the state’s spending limit. So you can imagine if the billionaire tax passes and we have $100 billion in new spending, that would really increase the state revenue, right? So then the other provision prohibits the state from enforcing taxes that are not subject to the spending limit, so. Basically, either of these things would undercut Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s dig in a little bit more on that first provision about the audits, because there is a state auditor whose job is to audit what are they doing, are these new audits necessary?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s dig in a little bit more on that first provision about the audits, because there is a state auditor whose job is to audit what are they doing, are these new audits necessary?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think opponents would say they’re not. You do have the ability of the legislature to request an audit of anything that they vote to. And yeah, we have an auditor who very regularly looks at state agencies and programs and spending and comes out with reports based on what the legislature has decided are the priorities.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think opponents would say they’re not. You do have the ability of the legislature to request an audit of anything that they vote to. And yeah, we have an auditor who very regularly looks at state agencies and programs and spending and comes out with reports based on what the legislature has decided are the priorities.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We need to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 41. If PropFest is helping you out, let us know by supporting our work. Your donations help keep projects like PropFast going. Contribute at donate.kqed.org. And you can get some sweet podcast swag as a thank you gift.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We need to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 41. If PropFest is helping you out, let us know by supporting our work. Your donations help keep projects like PropFast going. Contribute at donate.kqed.org. And you can get some sweet podcast swag as a thank you gift.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor message\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor message\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back. We’re talking with KQED’s Marisa Lagos about Proposition 41, the tax audit prop. Marisa, let’s get into who supports and opposes this prop. First up, what does support look like?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back. We’re talking with KQED’s Marisa Lagos about Proposition 41, the tax audit prop. Marisa, let’s get into who supports and opposes this prop. First up, what does support look like?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This was crafted by the folks who are opposing Proposition 40. It’s been largely funded by the same billionaires who are opposing that, again, sort of led by Sergey Brin. But a lot of familiar names here. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This was crafted by the folks who are opposing Proposition 40. It’s been largely funded by the same billionaires who are opposing that, again, sort of led by Sergey Brin. But a lot of familiar names here. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Names like Larry Page, who, with Sergey Brin, co-founded Alphabet, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Larry Ellison of Oracle, Jensen Huang of NVIDIA, mostly a who’s who of Silicon Valley.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Names like Larry Page, who, with Sergey Brin, co-founded Alphabet, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Larry Ellison of Oracle, Jensen Huang of NVIDIA, mostly a who’s who of Silicon Valley.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>but you also have folks like the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Taxpayers Association supporting this, and you know, these are groups that generally think that California spends too much money and have questions about whether it’s being properly spent. I mean, we’ve heard a lot of talk about this around homeless funding, right, in the governor’s race. Like, why are we spending billions of dollars and not addressing the underlying problem or making progress? So I think groups like the Chamber, the Cal Taxpayers Association, first of all, you know, just. Are pretty opposed to higher taxes and regulation, but also think that there would be some benefit in auditing all state spending, especially these special taxes, which, you know, arguably in some cases may not be getting sort of the scrutiny that they could. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>but you also have folks like the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Taxpayers Association supporting this, and you know, these are groups that generally think that California spends too much money and have questions about whether it’s being properly spent. I mean, we’ve heard a lot of talk about this around homeless funding, right, in the governor’s race. Like, why are we spending billions of dollars and not addressing the underlying problem or making progress? So I think groups like the Chamber, the Cal Taxpayers Association, first of all, you know, just. Are pretty opposed to higher taxes and regulation, but also think that there would be some benefit in auditing all state spending, especially these special taxes, which, you know, arguably in some cases may not be getting sort of the scrutiny that they could. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is lining up against Prop 41 and why? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is lining up against Prop 41 and why? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so the opponents are the same groups that are supporting Prop 40 that put the billionaire tax on the ballot. So SEIU, HW West, the State Democratic Party. The California Federation of Labor Unions, they see this really as an attempt to undercut, to nullify the billionaire tax proposal and that it’s not really as much about good government as it is about that.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so the opponents are the same groups that are supporting Prop 40 that put the billionaire tax on the ballot. So SEIU, HW West, the State Democratic Party. The California Federation of Labor Unions, they see this really as an attempt to undercut, to nullify the billionaire tax proposal and that it’s not really as much about good government as it is about that.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So if Prop 40 and 41 were both to pass, how does that play out?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So if Prop 40 and 41 were both to pass, how does that play out?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>On which one gets more votes. If Prop 40 got more votes, then it would stand and the only provisions of Prop 41 I believe that would take effect would be, you know, the audits and the spending limit. It would affect future special taxes, not this one. If 41 got more vote than 40, it would make it sort of unenforceable because so many provisions in 41 conflict with 40 and under California law, if something is on the same ballot together and they’re in a certain way, whatever gets more votes is kind of the law of the land. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>On which one gets more votes. If Prop 40 got more votes, then it would stand and the only provisions of Prop 41 I believe that would take effect would be, you know, the audits and the spending limit. It would affect future special taxes, not this one. If 41 got more vote than 40, it would make it sort of unenforceable because so many provisions in 41 conflict with 40 and under California law, if something is on the same ballot together and they’re in a certain way, whatever gets more votes is kind of the law of the land. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But in the past, I know that’s gone to a judge, ultimately, to decide. Is that what would happen here, too?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But in the past, I know that’s gone to a judge, ultimately, to decide. Is that what would happen here, too?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think regardless of whether any of these pass individually, I believe that there will be court challenges.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think regardless of whether any of these pass individually, I believe that there will be court challenges.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters are going to be thinking about this suite of three props, proposition 40, 41 and 42? Will they be connecting them all and voting in one direction, or could it go like we’ve seen in the past, where sometimes you get this mixed message from voters on sort of opposing props? \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters are going to be thinking about this suite of three props, proposition 40, 41 and 42? Will they be connecting them all and voting in one direction, or could it go like we’ve seen in the past, where sometimes you get this mixed message from voters on sort of opposing props? \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think that’s really gonna depend on how well the Yes on 40 campaign can draw a straight line between getting someone’s support and getting them to oppose these other measures. The billionaires and other folks who oppose the billionaire tax are not gonna wanna talk about Prop 40 when they talk about props 41 and 42. They wanna make these sort of just standalone good government measures. And so I think that’s sort of an outstanding question because you don’t have a traditional campaign against 41 and 40 too. Can the Yes on 40 folks really make clear in voters’ minds that these are all tied together, and even if you like some of the provisions of these other ballot measures, that by supporting them, you would essentially be casting another vote against the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think that’s really gonna depend on how well the Yes on 40 campaign can draw a straight line between getting someone’s support and getting them to oppose these other measures. The billionaires and other folks who oppose the billionaire tax are not gonna wanna talk about Prop 40 when they talk about props 41 and 42. They wanna make these sort of just standalone good government measures. And so I think that’s sort of an outstanding question because you don’t have a traditional campaign against 41 and 40 too. Can the Yes on 40 folks really make clear in voters’ minds that these are all tied together, and even if you like some of the provisions of these other ballot measures, that by supporting them, you would essentially be casting another vote against the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>When it comes to campaign spending, what are we seeing here?\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>When it comes to campaign spending, what are we seeing here?\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This one is very lopsided. We’ve seen the folks pushing Prop 41, yes on 41, raise more than 46 million so far. Most of that is coming from the same pack that is fighting the billionaire tax. It’s called Building a Better California. It was founded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires. And I think one thing that’s important to note is that We’re probably going to be seeing some crossover messaging. So a lot of the money being spent on the other ballot measures will also affect this one. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This one is very lopsided. We’ve seen the folks pushing Prop 41, yes on 41, raise more than 46 million so far. Most of that is coming from the same pack that is fighting the billionaire tax. It’s called Building a Better California. It was founded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires. And I think one thing that’s important to note is that We’re probably going to be seeing some crossover messaging. So a lot of the money being spent on the other ballot measures will also affect this one. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But sounds like really no spending on the no side.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But sounds like really no spending on the no side.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>No, and I think what you’re seeing is really that these are sort of a combined campaign for the other side. The unions that are pushing the billionaire tax are also pushing back against 41 and 42, but there isn’t that same level of like an organized campaign against each of them, in part because these are good government measures that sound very good on their face. I think it’s not something that you have the same sort of coalition. Able to sort of raise money and stand up against the way you might in some other sort of more traditional fights between the business community and labor.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>No, and I think what you’re seeing is really that these are sort of a combined campaign for the other side. The unions that are pushing the billionaire tax are also pushing back against 41 and 42, but there isn’t that same level of like an organized campaign against each of them, in part because these are good government measures that sound very good on their face. I think it’s not something that you have the same sort of coalition. Able to sort of raise money and stand up against the way you might in some other sort of more traditional fights between the business community and labor.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It was my pleasure. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It was my pleasure. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 41 would create new rules about auditing state programs that would receive revenue from special taxes. It would also make new special taxes part of the state’s spending limit. A vote no means things would stay the same as they are now.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 41 would create new rules about auditing state programs that would receive revenue from special taxes. It would also make new special taxes part of the state’s spending limit. A vote no means things would stay the same as they are now.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. This series is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. This series is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s produced by Erika Cruz Guevara, Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s produced by Erika Cruz Guevara, Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQD podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQD podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 42, which aims to make it harder to create a wealth tax in California. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 42, which aims to make it harder to create a wealth tax in California. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll get into all that tomorrow. See you then.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll get into all that tomorrow. See you then.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Proposition 41 would require audits of any state programs that would benefit from special taxes.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1790721004,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 43,
"wordCount": 2190
},
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 41: Requires New Audits of Special Tax Programs | KQED",
"description": "Proposition 41 would require audits of any state programs that would benefit from special taxes.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "Prop 41: Requires New Audits of Special Tax Programs",
"datePublished": "2026-10-06T03:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-09-29T15:30:04-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 31795,
"slug": "california",
"name": "California"
},
"source": "Prop Fest 2026",
"sourceUrl": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"audioUrl": "https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/pdst.fm/e/traffic.megaphone.fm/KQINC2885454190.mp3",
"sticky": false,
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12101275/prop-41-requires-new-audits-of-special-tax-programs",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003ch2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Episode Transcript\u003c/h2>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You’re going to see a lot about taxes on this year’s ballot.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Yesterday we talked about Prop 40, which would be a one-time tax on billionaires. If you haven’t listened to that episode yet, I suggest you go give it a listen, because today we’re dropping episodes on Props 41 and 42. And both of those are related to Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Now, Prop 41 would require more audits on the programs that are funded by special taxes. Is it good governance or red tape meant to make it harder to pass new taxes?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>This is how Prop 41 reads on your ballot, and just a warning, it’s pretty wonky.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Voice Over: \u003c/strong>Prohibits new state taxes that exclude revenues from state spending limit. Requires audits for new state special taxes.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara, host of The Bay.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>And I’m Olivia Ellen Price, host of Bay Curious. You’re listening to PropFest, our special series that goes through the statewide propositions on your ballot. They can be so confusing and consequential. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We’ll explain the ins and outs of each one in hopes that you feel confident in your vote, no matter which side you come down on.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Here to walk us through Prop 41 is KQED political correspondent and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown, Marisa Lagos. Welcome, Marissa. Hey. So the language of Prop 41 sort of sounds like gobbledygook to some voters. And we will straighten that out pretty soon. But maybe before we dive into all those specifics of this ballot measure, give us some context about who put this on the ballot and why.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, this was placed on the ballot, essentially by the billionaires who were opposing Prop 40. That’s the billionaire tax. And both Prop 41 and another measure, Prop 42, were written after the billionaire proposal was already out collecting signatures. So they were crafted really as an attempt to undercut that ballot measure. And so it’s kind of impossible to talk about them without talking about the billionaire tax and the billionaires who are trying to kill the tax. Got it. OK, helpful context. So now let’s get into what Prop 41 does. So Prop 41 has kind of three main provisions. The first one is it’s going to require ongoing audits of state programs that are funded by what’s called special taxes. So in California, when tax money comes in, most of it goes to the general fund. That is the main spending account that pays for K-12 schools and most of the things the state does. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>But, sometimes that revenue has been sort of written into law as a special tax, and those are earmarked for specific programs. You can think of something like the gas tax, which, you know, funds roads and infrastructure. That is not money that goes into the general fund. This measure says that before voters even weigh in on a proposed special tax they need to have an audit of what the money would be spent on. And then it requires ongoing audits in the future if a tax is actually passed. And so it’s being framed by proponents as a good government measure, right? This gives more transparency. Why are we spending billions of dollars in state money and not knowing where it goes essentially? Prop 41 has two other important provisions, and these are the ones that would conflict with the billionaire tax and potentially nullify them. And they both have something to do with the GAN limit, otherwise known as the state spending limit. This was a law put in place by voters in the 1970s, and it puts a cap on how much revenue the state can spend every year. It essentially says that if state revenues grow too fast, you gotta give some of that money back to taxpayers. Some special taxes are excluded from that limit, including the gas tax example. So one of the provisions in Prop 41 says new special taxes would all be subject to the state’s spending limit. So you can imagine if the billionaire tax passes and we have $100 billion in new spending, that would really increase the state revenue, right? So then the other provision prohibits the state from enforcing taxes that are not subject to the spending limit, so. Basically, either of these things would undercut Prop 40.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Let’s dig in a little bit more on that first provision about the audits, because there is a state auditor whose job is to audit what are they doing, are these new audits necessary?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, I think opponents would say they’re not. You do have the ability of the legislature to request an audit of anything that they vote to. And yeah, we have an auditor who very regularly looks at state agencies and programs and spending and comes out with reports based on what the legislature has decided are the priorities.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We need to take a quick break, but when we get back, more on Prop 41. If PropFest is helping you out, let us know by supporting our work. Your donations help keep projects like PropFast going. Contribute at donate.kqed.org. And you can get some sweet podcast swag as a thank you gift.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Sponsor message\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Welcome back. We’re talking with KQED’s Marisa Lagos about Proposition 41, the tax audit prop. Marisa, let’s get into who supports and opposes this prop. First up, what does support look like?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This was crafted by the folks who are opposing Proposition 40. It’s been largely funded by the same billionaires who are opposing that, again, sort of led by Sergey Brin. But a lot of familiar names here. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Names like Larry Page, who, with Sergey Brin, co-founded Alphabet, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Larry Ellison of Oracle, Jensen Huang of NVIDIA, mostly a who’s who of Silicon Valley.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah,\u003cstrong> \u003c/strong>but you also have folks like the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Taxpayers Association supporting this, and you know, these are groups that generally think that California spends too much money and have questions about whether it’s being properly spent. I mean, we’ve heard a lot of talk about this around homeless funding, right, in the governor’s race. Like, why are we spending billions of dollars and not addressing the underlying problem or making progress? So I think groups like the Chamber, the Cal Taxpayers Association, first of all, you know, just. Are pretty opposed to higher taxes and regulation, but also think that there would be some benefit in auditing all state spending, especially these special taxes, which, you know, arguably in some cases may not be getting sort of the scrutiny that they could. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Who is lining up against Prop 41 and why? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>Yeah, so the opponents are the same groups that are supporting Prop 40 that put the billionaire tax on the ballot. So SEIU, HW West, the State Democratic Party. The California Federation of Labor Unions, they see this really as an attempt to undercut, to nullify the billionaire tax proposal and that it’s not really as much about good government as it is about that.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>So if Prop 40 and 41 were both to pass, how does that play out?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>On which one gets more votes. If Prop 40 got more votes, then it would stand and the only provisions of Prop 41 I believe that would take effect would be, you know, the audits and the spending limit. It would affect future special taxes, not this one. If 41 got more vote than 40, it would make it sort of unenforceable because so many provisions in 41 conflict with 40 and under California law, if something is on the same ballot together and they’re in a certain way, whatever gets more votes is kind of the law of the land. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But in the past, I know that’s gone to a judge, ultimately, to decide. Is that what would happen here, too?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think regardless of whether any of these pass individually, I believe that there will be court challenges.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>How do you think voters are going to be thinking about this suite of three props, proposition 40, 41 and 42? Will they be connecting them all and voting in one direction, or could it go like we’ve seen in the past, where sometimes you get this mixed message from voters on sort of opposing props? \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>I think that’s really gonna depend on how well the Yes on 40 campaign can draw a straight line between getting someone’s support and getting them to oppose these other measures. The billionaires and other folks who oppose the billionaire tax are not gonna wanna talk about Prop 40 when they talk about props 41 and 42. They wanna make these sort of just standalone good government measures. And so I think that’s sort of an outstanding question because you don’t have a traditional campaign against 41 and 40 too. Can the Yes on 40 folks really make clear in voters’ minds that these are all tied together, and even if you like some of the provisions of these other ballot measures, that by supporting them, you would essentially be casting another vote against the billionaire tax.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>When it comes to campaign spending, what are we seeing here?\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>This one is very lopsided. We’ve seen the folks pushing Prop 41, yes on 41, raise more than 46 million so far. Most of that is coming from the same pack that is fighting the billionaire tax. It’s called Building a Better California. It was founded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires. And I think one thing that’s important to note is that We’re probably going to be seeing some crossover messaging. So a lot of the money being spent on the other ballot measures will also affect this one. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>But sounds like really no spending on the no side.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>No, and I think what you’re seeing is really that these are sort of a combined campaign for the other side. The unions that are pushing the billionaire tax are also pushing back against 41 and 42, but there isn’t that same level of like an organized campaign against each of them, in part because these are good government measures that sound very good on their face. I think it’s not something that you have the same sort of coalition. Able to sort of raise money and stand up against the way you might in some other sort of more traditional fights between the business community and labor.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Marisa Lagos is a political correspondent at KQED and co-host of the podcast, Political Breakdown. Thanks, Marisa. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos: \u003c/strong>It was my pleasure. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>In a nutshell, a vote yes on Prop 41 would create new rules about auditing state programs that would receive revenue from special taxes. It would also make new special taxes part of the state’s spending limit. A vote no means things would stay the same as they are now.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>That’s it for PropFest today. This series is a collaboration between The Bay and Bay Curious podcasts. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>It’s produced by Erika Cruz Guevara, Alan Montecillo, Ericka Cruz Guevarra, Gabriella Glueck, Pauline Bartolone, Katrina Schwartz, Christopher Beale, Anna Casalme and me, Olivia Allen-Price. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>We get extra support from Katie Springer, Jen Chien, Maha Sanad, Ethan Toven-Lindsey.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>You can find audio and transcripts for this series at kqed.org slash prop fest.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>Support for the bay is provided in part by the Osher Production Fund.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>Some members of the KQD podcast team are represented by the Screen Actors Guild American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, San Francisco, Northern California Local.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Ericka Cruz Guevarra: \u003c/strong>I’m Erika Cruz Guevara. We’ll be back tomorrow with an explainer on Proposition 42, which aims to make it harder to create a wealth tax in California. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cstrong>Olivia Allen-Price: \u003c/strong>We’ll get into all that tomorrow. See you then.\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12101275/prop-41-requires-new-audits-of-special-tax-programs",
"authors": [
"234",
"3239",
"102"
],
"programs": [
"news_28779",
"news_33523",
"news_34552"
],
"series": [
"news_17986"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_28645",
"news_22598"
],
"featImg": "news_12101278",
"label": "source_news_12101275"
},
"news_12102904": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12102904",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102904",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791244424000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "san-francisco-democratic-party-chair-apologizes-after-sexual-assault-policy-broke-down",
"title": "San Francisco Democratic Party Chair Apologizes After Sexual Assault Policy ‘Broke Down’",
"publishDate": 1791244424,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "San Francisco Democratic Party Chair Apologizes After Sexual Assault Policy ‘Broke Down’ | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\n\u003cp>The top official for San Francisco’s Democratic Party issued a public \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfdems.org/chair/accountability\">apology\u003c/a> for failing to adequately evaluate \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11996787/reckoning-on-sexual-assault-roils-sf-democrats-as-mayoral-endorsement-looms\">sexual misconduct allegations\u003c/a> and \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12097058/san-francisco-democratic-party-endorses-manny-yekutiel-for-supervisor-after-sexual-assault-allegations\">endorsing\u003c/a> former San Francisco supervisor candidate Manny Yekutiel, who \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12102333/new-allegations-surface-against-san-francisco-supervisor-candidate-manny-yekutiel\">abandoned his bid\u003c/a> to represent District 8 last week after multiple men accused him of sexual assault. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chair Nancy Tung’s statement comes after mounting criticism over how the party handled the accusations against Yekutiel, who dropped out of the race after three men publicly accused him of sexual assault. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Brad Chapin, a former city gardener and political organizer, came forward earlier this year alleging that Yekutiel sexually assaulted him at a party in 2020. San Francisco’s Democratic Party voted to endorse Yekutiel after Chapin spoke up. Last week, two additional men — a man named Ryan Clark and his partner — made similar allegations.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I publicly and sincerely apologize to Mr. Chapin for how our process treated his complaint and for an endorsement decision that caused him further harm,” Tung wrote. “As party chair, I also apologize for how this endorsement hurt Ryan Clark, his partner and others.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-11996722\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1920x1280.jpg 1920w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">San Francisco Democratic Party Chair Nancy Tung speaks during a rally in support of the presidential nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris at City Hall in San Francisco on July 22, 2024. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>But Chapin said Ting’s apology didn’t land for him. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I believe that she’s only apologizing because she got caught and everybody can see it and she wants to save her own reputation,” he said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin filed a police report in April, and also reached out to the local Democratic Party to file a complaint through the organization’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12016733/sf-democrats-adopt-new-sexual-assault-reporting-policies\">relatively new reporting policies\u003c/a> for sexual assault and harassment. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The party’s policy created ways for a person to submit a complaint, including to an ombudsperson who determines whether the complaint potentially violates the code of conduct.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>If so, an independent investigator reviews the facts and evidence of the report and submits findings to the party’s judicial commission and adjudication panel to determine whether the violation occurred. If it did, consequences could include private or public admonishment or expulsion from the club or party. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The party adopted the policy in December 2024 after accusations surfaced against prominent political organizers, including John Jacobo and Kesvin Ortiz, two progressives who have both denied the allegations.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Some survivors of sexual assault criticized how the party handled those past allegations and the protocol designed to handle future cases. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin said he did not receive a response from the Democratic Party’s ombudsperson or investigators until after he came forward with his story publicly in the media. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>After following up on Chapin’s claims, the adjudication panel for the Democratic Party met to review an independent investigator’s findings, ultimately saying that the accusation could not be substantiated and that it was outside of their jurisdiction. The party then voted to publicly endorse Yekutiel. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin went to the endorsement meeting, publicly calling the process a “sham.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Meanwhile, Yekutiel’s campaign appeared to weather the initial allegation, with many allies continuing to support him. Mayor Daniel Lurie, who created the Civic Joy Fund with Yekutiel, endorsed him after Chapin came forward. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The political climate changed last week, however, when Clark and his partner came forward alleging that Yekutiel had sexually assaulted them at a nightclub in San Francisco in 2023. Within hours of the new allegations coming out, prominent backers revoked their endorsements for Yekutiel, including Lurie and other elected officials.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“My endorsement is a statement of my confidence in someone’s character and leadership, and in light of the additional accounts reported today I am withdrawing it,” Lurie said in a statement last week, adding that he will not make a new endorsement in the District 8 race. “Coming forward is hard and these survivors deserve to be heard, and treated with dignity and respect.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Yekutiel has denied the allegations.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I am not admitting to having assaulted anyone and some of the things that are being said about me are fundamentally untrue,” Yekutiel said in a statement when he announced he would drop out. “But I am deeply sorry for any boundaries that I crossed. I’m going to take this time to work on myself.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1980\" height=\"1321\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12090328\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153.jpg 1980w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153-1536x1025.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1980px) 100vw, 1980px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Manny Yekutiel introduces U.S. Presidential candidate Tom Steyer during Steyer’s appearance at Manny’s in San Francisco on July 17, 2019. (Scott Strazzante/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images))\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin is still reeling from the consequences and backlash he faced for coming forward. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Her apology rings pretty hollow,” Chapin said of Tung’s response on Monday. “She gave me almost none of the rights outlined in her own code of conduct.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>He said he handed over 55 names of witnesses who could support his allegations but did not know if any had been contacted. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“The process is designed to insulate the political aspect of the party, and so I don’t actually know what Mr. Chapin’s complaint looked like. I don’t know what he turned over to the investigators,” Tung said. “The investigation was done by a professional law firm that specializes in these types of misconduct complaints, and so I don’t know if those 55 people had been contacted or not.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin also said he was not given time to appeal the findings before the adjudication panel made them public and the party voted to endorse Yekutiel. Chapin said he has also requested a copy of the investigation, and that Tung has refused to share the file. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Because the judicial counsel did not act on [the complaint], I chose not to release the investigation,” Tung said. “Given what’s happened recently, it’s a conversation I’m willing to have with Mr. Chapin and his lawyer to see if there is something that we should consider.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12062093\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">San Francisco Supervisor Rafael Mandelman speaks at a press event in front of San Francisco City Hall on Oct. 29, 2025. (Martin do Nascimento/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>Rafael Mandelman, a moderate Democrat, currently represents District 8, which includes the Castro, Glen Park, Diamond Heights, Noe Valley and other neighborhoods. He is terming out, leaving an open seat on the city’s current majority-moderate Board of Supervisors.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Before last week, Yekutiel was a frontrunner. He is well-connected through his cafe in the Mission District, Manny’s, which frequently hosts events with prominent political and community leaders. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The race now comes down to Gary McCoy, who previously worked for Rep. Nancy Pelosi and has the former Speaker of the House’s endorsement, as well as patent attorney Michael Nguyen and former DoorDash employee Darshini Patel.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Tung said the episode is prompting changes to the code of conduct on sexual misconduct. The party is holding a \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfdems.org/chair/statement-on-calling-special-meeting-october-11\">special meeting on Oct. 11\u003c/a> to reconsider its endorsement in District 8, and Tung said she will be endorsing Gary McCoy in the race. Some supervisors who previously endorsed Yekutiel have also since moved their endorsement to McCoy, including Stephen Sherrill, Danny Sauter and Bilal Mahmood. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>At the same Oct. 11 meeting, Tung said there will be a discussion about reexamining the code of conduct around sexual assault and harassment and outlining next steps to revise the policy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“There are hard lessons all the way around this process, but we need to keep trying,” Tung said. “I hope that people and organizations will decide that they want to move forward together with the party and to try to do something, to try to create something better out of all of this.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Some critics are calling for Tung herself to step down following the episode. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“She has lost the trust of survivors, allies and the community at large,” an Instagram post from the San Francisco Women’s Political Committee said. “Brad Chapin came forward when it was hard, and he deserved action when it mattered. An apology after the fact does not undo that.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>When asked for a response to the calls for resignation, Tung said, “It’s all very fresh. I do want to speak to members of the SFWPC. I don’t think that trading statements over Instagram is necessarily the best way to have a conversation.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Tung said she reached out to Chapin on a messaging app, but the two have not spoken directly as of Monday, when she released her public apology naming him. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We need a Democratic Party and a local government that advocates and protects survivors,” Chapin said. “I look forward to hopefully having a meeting with the mayor and others who are capable of making real change happen.”\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The top official for San Francisco’s Democratic Party issued a public \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfdems.org/chair/accountability\">apology\u003c/a> for failing to adequately evaluate \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11996787/reckoning-on-sexual-assault-roils-sf-democrats-as-mayoral-endorsement-looms\">sexual misconduct allegations\u003c/a> and \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12097058/san-francisco-democratic-party-endorses-manny-yekutiel-for-supervisor-after-sexual-assault-allegations\">endorsing\u003c/a> former San Francisco supervisor candidate Manny Yekutiel, who \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12102333/new-allegations-surface-against-san-francisco-supervisor-candidate-manny-yekutiel\">abandoned his bid\u003c/a> to represent District 8 last week after multiple men accused him of sexual assault. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The top official for San Francisco’s Democratic Party issued a public \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfdems.org/chair/accountability\">apology\u003c/a> for failing to adequately evaluate \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11996787/reckoning-on-sexual-assault-roils-sf-democrats-as-mayoral-endorsement-looms\">sexual misconduct allegations\u003c/a> and \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12097058/san-francisco-democratic-party-endorses-manny-yekutiel-for-supervisor-after-sexual-assault-allegations\">endorsing\u003c/a> former San Francisco supervisor candidate Manny Yekutiel, who \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12102333/new-allegations-surface-against-san-francisco-supervisor-candidate-manny-yekutiel\">abandoned his bid\u003c/a> to represent District 8 last week after multiple men accused him of sexual assault. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Chair Nancy Tung’s statement comes after mounting criticism over how the party handled the accusations against Yekutiel, who dropped out of the race after three men publicly accused him of sexual assault. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Chair Nancy Tung’s statement comes after mounting criticism over how the party handled the accusations against Yekutiel, who dropped out of the race after three men publicly accused him of sexual assault. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Brad Chapin, a former city gardener and political organizer, came forward earlier this year alleging that Yekutiel sexually assaulted him at a party in 2020. San Francisco’s Democratic Party voted to endorse Yekutiel after Chapin spoke up. Last week, two additional men — a man named Ryan Clark and his partner — made similar allegations.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Brad Chapin, a former city gardener and political organizer, came forward earlier this year alleging that Yekutiel sexually assaulted him at a party in 2020. San Francisco’s Democratic Party voted to endorse Yekutiel after Chapin spoke up. Last week, two additional men — a man named Ryan Clark and his partner — made similar allegations.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“I publicly and sincerely apologize to Mr. Chapin for how our process treated his complaint and for an endorsement decision that caused him further harm,” Tung wrote. “As party chair, I also apologize for how this endorsement hurt Ryan Clark, his partner and others.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“I publicly and sincerely apologize to Mr. Chapin for how our process treated his complaint and for an endorsement decision that caused him further harm,” Tung wrote. “As party chair, I also apologize for how this endorsement hurt Ryan Clark, his partner and others.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 11996722,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"align": "center",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1920x1280.jpg 1920w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-11996722\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1920x1280.jpg 1920w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">San Francisco Democratic Party Chair Nancy Tung speaks during a rally in support of the presidential nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris at City Hall in San Francisco on July 22, 2024.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-11996722\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">San Francisco Democratic Party Chair Nancy Tung speaks during a rally in support of the presidential nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris at City Hall in San Francisco on July 22, 2024.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>But Chapin said Ting’s apology didn’t land for him. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>But Chapin said Ting’s apology didn’t land for him. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“I believe that she’s only apologizing because she got caught and everybody can see it and she wants to save her own reputation,” he said. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“I believe that she’s only apologizing because she got caught and everybody can see it and she wants to save her own reputation,” he said. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Chapin filed a police report in April, and also reached out to the local Democratic Party to file a complaint through the organization’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12016733/sf-democrats-adopt-new-sexual-assault-reporting-policies\">relatively new reporting policies\u003c/a> for sexual assault and harassment. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Chapin filed a police report in April, and also reached out to the local Democratic Party to file a complaint through the organization’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12016733/sf-democrats-adopt-new-sexual-assault-reporting-policies\">relatively new reporting policies\u003c/a> for sexual assault and harassment. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The party’s policy created ways for a person to submit a complaint, including to an ombudsperson who determines whether the complaint potentially violates the code of conduct.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The party’s policy created ways for a person to submit a complaint, including to an ombudsperson who determines whether the complaint potentially violates the code of conduct.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>If so, an independent investigator reviews the facts and evidence of the report and submits findings to the party’s judicial commission and adjudication panel to determine whether the violation occurred. If it did, consequences could include private or public admonishment or expulsion from the club or party. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>If so, an independent investigator reviews the facts and evidence of the report and submits findings to the party’s judicial commission and adjudication panel to determine whether the violation occurred. If it did, consequences could include private or public admonishment or expulsion from the club or party. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The party adopted the policy in December 2024 after accusations surfaced against prominent political organizers, including John Jacobo and Kesvin Ortiz, two progressives who have both denied the allegations.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The party adopted the policy in December 2024 after accusations surfaced against prominent political organizers, including John Jacobo and Kesvin Ortiz, two progressives who have both denied the allegations.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Some survivors of sexual assault criticized how the party handled those past allegations and the protocol designed to handle future cases. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Some survivors of sexual assault criticized how the party handled those past allegations and the protocol designed to handle future cases. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed-v2/related-articles",
"attrs": {
"postIds": [
"news_12102105"
],
"label": "Related Articles",
"maxPosts": 1,
"showImages": false,
"heroImage": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/09/260828-SOUTH-BAY-DATA-CENTERS-MD-07-KQED.jpg",
"query": "",
"labelWasCleared": false,
"heroImageAlt": "",
"heroImageLink": "",
"labelLink": "",
"alignment": "right",
"target": "_self",
"manualLinks": [],
"posts": []
},
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Chapin said he did not receive a response from the Democratic Party’s ombudsperson or investigators until after he came forward with his story publicly in the media. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Chapin said he did not receive a response from the Democratic Party’s ombudsperson or investigators until after he came forward with his story publicly in the media. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>After following up on Chapin’s claims, the adjudication panel for the Democratic Party met to review an independent investigator’s findings, ultimately saying that the accusation could not be substantiated and that it was outside of their jurisdiction. The party then voted to publicly endorse Yekutiel. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>After following up on Chapin’s claims, the adjudication panel for the Democratic Party met to review an independent investigator’s findings, ultimately saying that the accusation could not be substantiated and that it was outside of their jurisdiction. The party then voted to publicly endorse Yekutiel. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Chapin went to the endorsement meeting, publicly calling the process a “sham.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Chapin went to the endorsement meeting, publicly calling the process a “sham.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Meanwhile, Yekutiel’s campaign appeared to weather the initial allegation, with many allies continuing to support him. Mayor Daniel Lurie, who created the Civic Joy Fund with Yekutiel, endorsed him after Chapin came forward. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Meanwhile, Yekutiel’s campaign appeared to weather the initial allegation, with many allies continuing to support him. Mayor Daniel Lurie, who created the Civic Joy Fund with Yekutiel, endorsed him after Chapin came forward. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The political climate changed last week, however, when Clark and his partner came forward alleging that Yekutiel had sexually assaulted them at a nightclub in San Francisco in 2023. Within hours of the new allegations coming out, prominent backers revoked their endorsements for Yekutiel, including Lurie and other elected officials.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The political climate changed last week, however, when Clark and his partner came forward alleging that Yekutiel had sexually assaulted them at a nightclub in San Francisco in 2023. Within hours of the new allegations coming out, prominent backers revoked their endorsements for Yekutiel, including Lurie and other elected officials.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“My endorsement is a statement of my confidence in someone’s character and leadership, and in light of the additional accounts reported today I am withdrawing it,” Lurie said in a statement last week, adding that he will not make a new endorsement in the District 8 race. “Coming forward is hard and these survivors deserve to be heard, and treated with dignity and respect.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“My endorsement is a statement of my confidence in someone’s character and leadership, and in light of the additional accounts reported today I am withdrawing it,” Lurie said in a statement last week, adding that he will not make a new endorsement in the District 8 race. “Coming forward is hard and these survivors deserve to be heard, and treated with dignity and respect.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Yekutiel has denied the allegations.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Yekutiel has denied the allegations.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“I am not admitting to having assaulted anyone and some of the things that are being said about me are fundamentally untrue,” Yekutiel said in a statement when he announced he would drop out. “But I am deeply sorry for any boundaries that I crossed. I’m going to take this time to work on myself.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“I am not admitting to having assaulted anyone and some of the things that are being said about me are fundamentally untrue,” Yekutiel said in a statement when he announced he would drop out. “But I am deeply sorry for any boundaries that I crossed. I’m going to take this time to work on myself.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12090328,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"align": "center",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153.jpg 1980w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153-1536x1025.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12090328\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153.jpg 1980w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153-1536x1025.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Manny Yekutiel introduces U.S. Presidential candidate Tom Steyer during Steyer’s appearance at Manny’s in San Francisco on July 17, 2019.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Scott Strazzante/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images))\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12090328\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Manny Yekutiel introduces U.S. Presidential candidate Tom Steyer during Steyer’s appearance at Manny’s in San Francisco on July 17, 2019.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Scott Strazzante/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images))\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Chapin is still reeling from the consequences and backlash he faced for coming forward. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Chapin is still reeling from the consequences and backlash he faced for coming forward. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Her apology rings pretty hollow,” Chapin said of Tung’s response on Monday. “She gave me almost none of the rights outlined in her own code of conduct.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Her apology rings pretty hollow,” Chapin said of Tung’s response on Monday. “She gave me almost none of the rights outlined in her own code of conduct.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>He said he handed over 55 names of witnesses who could support his allegations but did not know if any had been contacted. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>He said he handed over 55 names of witnesses who could support his allegations but did not know if any had been contacted. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“The process is designed to insulate the political aspect of the party, and so I don’t actually know what Mr. Chapin’s complaint looked like. I don’t know what he turned over to the investigators,” Tung said. “The investigation was done by a professional law firm that specializes in these types of misconduct complaints, and so I don’t know if those 55 people had been contacted or not.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“The process is designed to insulate the political aspect of the party, and so I don’t actually know what Mr. Chapin’s complaint looked like. I don’t know what he turned over to the investigators,” Tung said. “The investigation was done by a professional law firm that specializes in these types of misconduct complaints, and so I don’t know if those 55 people had been contacted or not.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Chapin also said he was not given time to appeal the findings before the adjudication panel made them public and the party voted to endorse Yekutiel. Chapin said he has also requested a copy of the investigation, and that Tung has refused to share the file. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Chapin also said he was not given time to appeal the findings before the adjudication panel made them public and the party voted to endorse Yekutiel. Chapin said he has also requested a copy of the investigation, and that Tung has refused to share the file. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Because the judicial counsel did not act on [the complaint], I chose not to release the investigation,” Tung said. “Given what’s happened recently, it’s a conversation I’m willing to have with Mr. Chapin and his lawyer to see if there is something that we should consider.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Because the judicial counsel did not act on [the complaint], I chose not to release the investigation,” Tung said. “Given what’s happened recently, it’s a conversation I’m willing to have with Mr. Chapin and his lawyer to see if there is something that we should consider.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12062093,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"align": "center",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12062093\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">San Francisco Supervisor Rafael Mandelman speaks at a press event in front of San Francisco City Hall on Oct. 29, 2025.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Martin do Nascimento/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12062093\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">San Francisco Supervisor Rafael Mandelman speaks at a press event in front of San Francisco City Hall on Oct. 29, 2025.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Martin do Nascimento/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Rafael Mandelman, a moderate Democrat, currently represents District 8, which includes the Castro, Glen Park, Diamond Heights, Noe Valley and other neighborhoods. He is terming out, leaving an open seat on the city’s current majority-moderate Board of Supervisors.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Rafael Mandelman, a moderate Democrat, currently represents District 8, which includes the Castro, Glen Park, Diamond Heights, Noe Valley and other neighborhoods. He is terming out, leaving an open seat on the city’s current majority-moderate Board of Supervisors.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Before last week, Yekutiel was a frontrunner. He is well-connected through his cafe in the Mission District, Manny’s, which frequently hosts events with prominent political and community leaders. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Before last week, Yekutiel was a frontrunner. He is well-connected through his cafe in the Mission District, Manny’s, which frequently hosts events with prominent political and community leaders. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>The race now comes down to Gary McCoy, who previously worked for Rep. Nancy Pelosi and has the former Speaker of the House’s endorsement, as well as patent attorney Michael Nguyen and former DoorDash employee Darshini Patel.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>The race now comes down to Gary McCoy, who previously worked for Rep. Nancy Pelosi and has the former Speaker of the House’s endorsement, as well as patent attorney Michael Nguyen and former DoorDash employee Darshini Patel.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Tung said the episode is prompting changes to the code of conduct on sexual misconduct. The party is holding a \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfdems.org/chair/statement-on-calling-special-meeting-october-11\">special meeting on Oct. 11\u003c/a> to reconsider its endorsement in District 8, and Tung said she will be endorsing Gary McCoy in the race. Some supervisors who previously endorsed Yekutiel have also since moved their endorsement to McCoy, including Stephen Sherrill, Danny Sauter and Bilal Mahmood. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Tung said the episode is prompting changes to the code of conduct on sexual misconduct. The party is holding a \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfdems.org/chair/statement-on-calling-special-meeting-october-11\">special meeting on Oct. 11\u003c/a> to reconsider its endorsement in District 8, and Tung said she will be endorsing Gary McCoy in the race. Some supervisors who previously endorsed Yekutiel have also since moved their endorsement to McCoy, including Stephen Sherrill, Danny Sauter and Bilal Mahmood. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed-v2/related-articles",
"attrs": {
"postIds": [
"news_12102764"
],
"label": "Related Articles",
"maxPosts": 1,
"showImages": false,
"heroImage": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/06/GettyImages-2261843469-2000x1333.jpg",
"query": "",
"labelWasCleared": false,
"heroImageAlt": "",
"heroImageLink": "",
"labelLink": "",
"alignment": "right",
"target": "_self",
"manualLinks": [],
"posts": []
},
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>At the same Oct. 11 meeting, Tung said there will be a discussion about reexamining the code of conduct around sexual assault and harassment and outlining next steps to revise the policy. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>At the same Oct. 11 meeting, Tung said there will be a discussion about reexamining the code of conduct around sexual assault and harassment and outlining next steps to revise the policy. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“There are hard lessons all the way around this process, but we need to keep trying,” Tung said. “I hope that people and organizations will decide that they want to move forward together with the party and to try to do something, to try to create something better out of all of this.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“There are hard lessons all the way around this process, but we need to keep trying,” Tung said. “I hope that people and organizations will decide that they want to move forward together with the party and to try to do something, to try to create something better out of all of this.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Some critics are calling for Tung herself to step down following the episode. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Some critics are calling for Tung herself to step down following the episode. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“She has lost the trust of survivors, allies and the community at large,” an Instagram post from the San Francisco Women’s Political Committee said. “Brad Chapin came forward when it was hard, and he deserved action when it mattered. An apology after the fact does not undo that.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“She has lost the trust of survivors, allies and the community at large,” an Instagram post from the San Francisco Women’s Political Committee said. “Brad Chapin came forward when it was hard, and he deserved action when it mattered. An apology after the fact does not undo that.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>When asked for a response to the calls for resignation, Tung said, “It’s all very fresh. I do want to speak to members of the SFWPC. I don’t think that trading statements over Instagram is necessarily the best way to have a conversation.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>When asked for a response to the calls for resignation, Tung said, “It’s all very fresh. I do want to speak to members of the SFWPC. I don’t think that trading statements over Instagram is necessarily the best way to have a conversation.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Tung said she reached out to Chapin on a messaging app, but the two have not spoken directly as of Monday, when she released her public apology naming him. \u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Tung said she reached out to Chapin on a messaging app, but the two have not spoken directly as of Monday, when she released her public apology naming him. \u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“We need a Democratic Party and a local government that advocates and protects survivors,” Chapin said. “I look forward to hopefully having a meeting with the mayor and others who are capable of making real change happen.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“We need a Democratic Party and a local government that advocates and protects survivors,” Chapin said. “I look forward to hopefully having a meeting with the mayor and others who are capable of making real change happen.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Chair Nancy Tung said the local Democratic Party would reconsider its endorsement for the District 8 race and revise its sexual assault and harassment policy.",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791246781,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 36,
"wordCount": 1452
},
"headData": {
"title": "San Francisco Democratic Party Chair Apologizes After Sexual Assault Policy ‘Broke Down’ | KQED",
"description": "Chair Nancy Tung said the local Democratic Party would reconsider its endorsement for the District 8 race and revise its sexual assault and harassment policy.",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "San Francisco Democratic Party Chair Apologizes After Sexual Assault Policy ‘Broke Down’",
"datePublished": "2026-10-05T16:53:44-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-05T17:33:01-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 13,
"slug": "politics",
"name": "Politics"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprStoryId": "kqed-12102904",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12102904/san-francisco-democratic-party-chair-apologizes-after-sexual-assault-policy-broke-down",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003cp>The top official for San Francisco’s Democratic Party issued a public \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfdems.org/chair/accountability\">apology\u003c/a> for failing to adequately evaluate \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/11996787/reckoning-on-sexual-assault-roils-sf-democrats-as-mayoral-endorsement-looms\">sexual misconduct allegations\u003c/a> and \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12097058/san-francisco-democratic-party-endorses-manny-yekutiel-for-supervisor-after-sexual-assault-allegations\">endorsing\u003c/a> former San Francisco supervisor candidate Manny Yekutiel, who \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12102333/new-allegations-surface-against-san-francisco-supervisor-candidate-manny-yekutiel\">abandoned his bid\u003c/a> to represent District 8 last week after multiple men accused him of sexual assault. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chair Nancy Tung’s statement comes after mounting criticism over how the party handled the accusations against Yekutiel, who dropped out of the race after three men publicly accused him of sexual assault. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Brad Chapin, a former city gardener and political organizer, came forward earlier this year alleging that Yekutiel sexually assaulted him at a party in 2020. San Francisco’s Democratic Party voted to endorse Yekutiel after Chapin spoke up. Last week, two additional men — a man named Ryan Clark and his partner — made similar allegations.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I publicly and sincerely apologize to Mr. Chapin for how our process treated his complaint and for an endorsement decision that caused him further harm,” Tung wrote. “As party chair, I also apologize for how this endorsement hurt Ryan Clark, his partner and others.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-11996722\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2024/07/240722-SFKamalaHarrisRally-56-BL_qed-1920x1280.jpg 1920w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">San Francisco Democratic Party Chair Nancy Tung speaks during a rally in support of the presidential nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris at City Hall in San Francisco on July 22, 2024. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>But Chapin said Ting’s apology didn’t land for him. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I believe that she’s only apologizing because she got caught and everybody can see it and she wants to save her own reputation,” he said. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin filed a police report in April, and also reached out to the local Democratic Party to file a complaint through the organization’s \u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/12016733/sf-democrats-adopt-new-sexual-assault-reporting-policies\">relatively new reporting policies\u003c/a> for sexual assault and harassment. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The party’s policy created ways for a person to submit a complaint, including to an ombudsperson who determines whether the complaint potentially violates the code of conduct.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>If so, an independent investigator reviews the facts and evidence of the report and submits findings to the party’s judicial commission and adjudication panel to determine whether the violation occurred. If it did, consequences could include private or public admonishment or expulsion from the club or party. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The party adopted the policy in December 2024 after accusations surfaced against prominent political organizers, including John Jacobo and Kesvin Ortiz, two progressives who have both denied the allegations.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Some survivors of sexual assault criticized how the party handled those past allegations and the protocol designed to handle future cases. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin said he did not receive a response from the Democratic Party’s ombudsperson or investigators until after he came forward with his story publicly in the media. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>After following up on Chapin’s claims, the adjudication panel for the Democratic Party met to review an independent investigator’s findings, ultimately saying that the accusation could not be substantiated and that it was outside of their jurisdiction. The party then voted to publicly endorse Yekutiel. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin went to the endorsement meeting, publicly calling the process a “sham.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Meanwhile, Yekutiel’s campaign appeared to weather the initial allegation, with many allies continuing to support him. Mayor Daniel Lurie, who created the Civic Joy Fund with Yekutiel, endorsed him after Chapin came forward. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The political climate changed last week, however, when Clark and his partner came forward alleging that Yekutiel had sexually assaulted them at a nightclub in San Francisco in 2023. Within hours of the new allegations coming out, prominent backers revoked their endorsements for Yekutiel, including Lurie and other elected officials.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“My endorsement is a statement of my confidence in someone’s character and leadership, and in light of the additional accounts reported today I am withdrawing it,” Lurie said in a statement last week, adding that he will not make a new endorsement in the District 8 race. “Coming forward is hard and these survivors deserve to be heard, and treated with dignity and respect.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Yekutiel has denied the allegations.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“I am not admitting to having assaulted anyone and some of the things that are being said about me are fundamentally untrue,” Yekutiel said in a statement when he announced he would drop out. “But I am deeply sorry for any boundaries that I crossed. I’m going to take this time to work on myself.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1980\" height=\"1321\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12090328\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153.jpg 1980w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2026/07/GettyImages-1298791153-1536x1025.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1980px) 100vw, 1980px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Manny Yekutiel introduces U.S. Presidential candidate Tom Steyer during Steyer’s appearance at Manny’s in San Francisco on July 17, 2019. (Scott Strazzante/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images))\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin is still reeling from the consequences and backlash he faced for coming forward. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Her apology rings pretty hollow,” Chapin said of Tung’s response on Monday. “She gave me almost none of the rights outlined in her own code of conduct.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>He said he handed over 55 names of witnesses who could support his allegations but did not know if any had been contacted. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“The process is designed to insulate the political aspect of the party, and so I don’t actually know what Mr. Chapin’s complaint looked like. I don’t know what he turned over to the investigators,” Tung said. “The investigation was done by a professional law firm that specializes in these types of misconduct complaints, and so I don’t know if those 55 people had been contacted or not.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Chapin also said he was not given time to appeal the findings before the adjudication panel made them public and the party voted to endorse Yekutiel. Chapin said he has also requested a copy of the investigation, and that Tung has refused to share the file. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Because the judicial counsel did not act on [the complaint], I chose not to release the investigation,” Tung said. “Given what’s happened recently, it’s a conversation I’m willing to have with Mr. Chapin and his lawyer to see if there is something that we should consider.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\u003cdiv class=\"wp-block-image\">\n\u003cfigure class=\"aligncenter size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12062093\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/10/251029-SNAP-PRESSER-MD-05-KQED-1536x1024.jpg 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">San Francisco Supervisor Rafael Mandelman speaks at a press event in front of San Francisco City Hall on Oct. 29, 2025. (Martin do Nascimento/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\u003c/div>\n\n\n\u003cp>Rafael Mandelman, a moderate Democrat, currently represents District 8, which includes the Castro, Glen Park, Diamond Heights, Noe Valley and other neighborhoods. He is terming out, leaving an open seat on the city’s current majority-moderate Board of Supervisors.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Before last week, Yekutiel was a frontrunner. He is well-connected through his cafe in the Mission District, Manny’s, which frequently hosts events with prominent political and community leaders. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>The race now comes down to Gary McCoy, who previously worked for Rep. Nancy Pelosi and has the former Speaker of the House’s endorsement, as well as patent attorney Michael Nguyen and former DoorDash employee Darshini Patel.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Tung said the episode is prompting changes to the code of conduct on sexual misconduct. The party is holding a \u003ca href=\"https://www.sfdems.org/chair/statement-on-calling-special-meeting-october-11\">special meeting on Oct. 11\u003c/a> to reconsider its endorsement in District 8, and Tung said she will be endorsing Gary McCoy in the race. Some supervisors who previously endorsed Yekutiel have also since moved their endorsement to McCoy, including Stephen Sherrill, Danny Sauter and Bilal Mahmood. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>At the same Oct. 11 meeting, Tung said there will be a discussion about reexamining the code of conduct around sexual assault and harassment and outlining next steps to revise the policy. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“There are hard lessons all the way around this process, but we need to keep trying,” Tung said. “I hope that people and organizations will decide that they want to move forward together with the party and to try to do something, to try to create something better out of all of this.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Some critics are calling for Tung herself to step down following the episode. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“She has lost the trust of survivors, allies and the community at large,” an Instagram post from the San Francisco Women’s Political Committee said. “Brad Chapin came forward when it was hard, and he deserved action when it mattered. An apology after the fact does not undo that.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>When asked for a response to the calls for resignation, Tung said, “It’s all very fresh. I do want to speak to members of the SFWPC. I don’t think that trading statements over Instagram is necessarily the best way to have a conversation.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Tung said she reached out to Chapin on a messaging app, but the two have not spoken directly as of Monday, when she released her public apology naming him. \u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“We need a Democratic Party and a local government that advocates and protects survivors,” Chapin said. “I look forward to hopefully having a meeting with the mayor and others who are capable of making real change happen.”\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12102904/san-francisco-democratic-party-chair-apologizes-after-sexual-assault-policy-broke-down",
"authors": [
"11840"
],
"categories": [
"news_28250",
"news_8",
"news_13"
],
"tags": [
"news_20156",
"news_27626",
"news_37174",
"news_26778",
"news_17968",
"news_25113",
"news_38"
],
"featImg": "news_12102917",
"label": "news"
},
"news_12102760": {
"type": "posts",
"id": "news_12102760",
"meta": {
"index": "posts_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "12102760",
"score": null,
"sort": [
1791216000000
]
},
"guestAuthors": [],
"slug": "7-5b-california-science-agency-plan-free-from-trumps-influence-will-go-to-voters",
"title": "$7.5B California Science Agency Plan Free From Trump’s Influence Will Go to Voters",
"publishDate": 1791216000,
"format": "standard",
"headTitle": "$7.5B California Science Agency Plan Free From Trump’s Influence Will Go to Voters | KQED",
"labelTerm": {
"term": 5078,
"site": "news"
},
"content": "\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California \u003c/a>could create its own multi-billion-dollar science and health research agency under a bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last Wednesday, helping to fill a gap left by the politicization of science under the second Trump administration. Voters will decide in a year and a half whether to fund the idea, which the University of California has championed.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Approved by state lawmakers at a time when federal science funding has become increasingly unpredictable, \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB895\">the bill places a $7.5 billion bond measure on the March 2028 ballot\u003c/a> to pay for the creation of the California Foundation for Science and Health Research. The new state agency would provide grants and loans for projects in public health, climate science, agriculture and other areas. Panels of scientists would review proposals, and the agency would develop rules allowing the state to share in some of the profits from inventions made with its support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12027563\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1920x1280.jpg 1920w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Sen. Scott Wiener speaks during a press conference announcing legislation to increase nightlife in Downtown San Francisco to help the recovery of the neighborhood, in Union Square, San Francisco, on Feb. 18, 2025. Wiener is the author of the $7.5B proposal. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Scientific advancements are curing and preventing diseases, improving the lives of people living with chronic conditions, protecting our communities from wildfires, lowering the cost of food, and powering our economy,” the bill’s author, state Sen. Scott Wiener, said in a statement. “We cannot allow the federal government to throw away that hope for a better future.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Newsom joined Wiener to sign the bill atop the Golden Gate Bridge, a landmark built with voter-approved bond money in the 1930s that his press office described as a symbol of California ingenuity. He said the proposed science agency “does the opposite of what Donald Trump is doing (and) will allow us to double down on what makes this state great.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>It was a dramatic comeback for a measure that \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/06/29/12b-science-bond-to-offset-trump-research-cuts-misses-california-ballot-deadline\">almost died in the Legislature earlier this year\u003c/a>, when a more ambitious $23 billion version of the plan failed to make it onto the November ballot despite bipartisan support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Researchers from UC Berkeley and elsewhere had joined with UC leadership to lobby for the bond, hosting rallies and \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/02/03/california-foundation-for-science-and-health-research-bond-ballot-measure\">inviting lawmakers to a science fair\u003c/a> highlighting projects that had seen their funding stalled or canceled by the federal government.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>There were plenty to choose from: The Trump administration \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/education/higher-education/2026/07/research-grants-california-2/\">canceled nearly $2 billion in research grants to the University of California beginning in early 2025\u003c/a>, later acknowledging in court that officials searched for keywords such as “health equity” and “sexual orientation” in order to decide what to cut. While a court order restored much of the money, the National Science Foundation has since \u003ca href=\"https://www.insidehighered.com/news/government/science-research-policy/2026/09/21/nsf-over-billion-behind-grants-ies-says-will\">slowed grantmaking nationwide\u003c/a>, and President Trump has \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/23/us/politics/trump-nih-science-grants.html\">proposed giving political appointees more power to veto National Institutes of Health grants\u003c/a> that don’t align with his agenda.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>This spring, the National Science Foundation \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/05/08/donald-trump-uc-berkeley-research-grants-national-science-foundation\">canceled an additional $21 million in grants to UC Berkeley\u003c/a>, accusing the projects’ lead researchers of accepting foreign funding without disclosing it, a charge some of those scientists denied. UC President James Milliken has called the disruption of federal research funding “one of the gravest threats to the University of California in our 157-year history.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Lawmakers nevertheless declined to move the science bond forward this spring amid worries about competing demands on state funds – including a housing bond on the November ballot and the possible need to backfill other federal cuts. But negotiations among bill supporters, legislative leaders and the governor over the summer led to the scaled-down version that Newsom signed Wednesday.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Along with the University of California, California State University, private universities, and independent labs would all be potentially eligible for grants from the new state fund. A $7.5 billion state fund would not by itself make up for the instability in federal grants – the UC alone \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5143\">received nearly $5 billion in federal research funding in fiscal year 2024-25\u003c/a>. But supporters say it could be especially helpful to researchers in fields such as climate science that are critical to the state’s future but have run afoul of Trump administration priorities.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Berkeleyside partners with the nonprofit newsroom \u003ca href=\"https://www.opencampus.org/\">Open Campus\u003c/a> on higher education coverage.\u003c/em> \u003cem>This story was originally published by \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/\">Berkeleyside\u003c/a> and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"blocks": [
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California \u003c/a>could create its own multi-billion-dollar science and health research agency under a bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last Wednesday, helping to fill a gap left by the politicization of science under the second Trump administration. Voters will decide in a year and a half whether to fund the idea, which the University of California has championed.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California \u003c/a>could create its own multi-billion-dollar science and health research agency under a bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last Wednesday, helping to fill a gap left by the politicization of science under the second Trump administration. Voters will decide in a year and a half whether to fund the idea, which the University of California has championed.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Approved by state lawmakers at a time when federal science funding has become increasingly unpredictable, \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB895\">the bill places a $7.5 billion bond measure on the March 2028 ballot\u003c/a> to pay for the creation of the California Foundation for Science and Health Research. The new state agency would provide grants and loans for projects in public health, climate science, agriculture and other areas. Panels of scientists would review proposals, and the agency would develop rules allowing the state to share in some of the profits from inventions made with its support.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Approved by state lawmakers at a time when federal science funding has become increasingly unpredictable, \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB895\">the bill places a $7.5 billion bond measure on the March 2028 ballot\u003c/a> to pay for the creation of the California Foundation for Science and Health Research. The new state agency would provide grants and loans for projects in public health, climate science, agriculture and other areas. Panels of scientists would review proposals, and the agency would develop rules allowing the state to share in some of the profits from inventions made with its support.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/image",
"attrs": {
"id": 12027563,
"sizeSlug": "full",
"linkDestination": "none",
"alt": "",
"srcset": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1920x1280.jpg 1920w",
"sizes": "(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)"
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12027563\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1920x1280.jpg 1920w\" sizes=\"(min-width: 992px) min(100vw, 1536px), (min-width: 768px) min(100vw, 1280px), min(100vw, 1020px)\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Sen. Scott Wiener speaks during a press conference announcing legislation to increase nightlife in Downtown San Francisco to help the recovery of the neighborhood, in Union Square, San Francisco, on Feb. 18, 2025. Wiener is the author of the $7.5B proposal.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12027563\"/>\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Sen. Scott Wiener speaks during a press conference announcing legislation to increase nightlife in Downtown San Francisco to help the recovery of the neighborhood, in Union Square, San Francisco, on Feb. 18, 2025. Wiener is the author of the $7.5B proposal.\u003ccite class=\"wp-inline-image-credit\"> (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/cite>\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>“Scientific advancements are curing and preventing diseases, improving the lives of people living with chronic conditions, protecting our communities from wildfires, lowering the cost of food, and powering our economy,” the bill’s author, state Sen. Scott Wiener, said in a statement. “We cannot allow the federal government to throw away that hope for a better future.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>“Scientific advancements are curing and preventing diseases, improving the lives of people living with chronic conditions, protecting our communities from wildfires, lowering the cost of food, and powering our economy,” the bill’s author, state Sen. Scott Wiener, said in a statement. “We cannot allow the federal government to throw away that hope for a better future.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Newsom joined Wiener to sign the bill atop the Golden Gate Bridge, a landmark built with voter-approved bond money in the 1930s that his press office described as a symbol of California ingenuity. He said the proposed science agency “does the opposite of what Donald Trump is doing (and) will allow us to double down on what makes this state great.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Newsom joined Wiener to sign the bill atop the Golden Gate Bridge, a landmark built with voter-approved bond money in the 1930s that his press office described as a symbol of California ingenuity. He said the proposed science agency “does the opposite of what Donald Trump is doing (and) will allow us to double down on what makes this state great.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>It was a dramatic comeback for a measure that \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/06/29/12b-science-bond-to-offset-trump-research-cuts-misses-california-ballot-deadline\">almost died in the Legislature earlier this year\u003c/a>, when a more ambitious $23 billion version of the plan failed to make it onto the November ballot despite bipartisan support.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>It was a dramatic comeback for a measure that \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/06/29/12b-science-bond-to-offset-trump-research-cuts-misses-california-ballot-deadline\">almost died in the Legislature earlier this year\u003c/a>, when a more ambitious $23 billion version of the plan failed to make it onto the November ballot despite bipartisan support.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Researchers from UC Berkeley and elsewhere had joined with UC leadership to lobby for the bond, hosting rallies and \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/02/03/california-foundation-for-science-and-health-research-bond-ballot-measure\">inviting lawmakers to a science fair\u003c/a> highlighting projects that had seen their funding stalled or canceled by the federal government.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Researchers from UC Berkeley and elsewhere had joined with UC leadership to lobby for the bond, hosting rallies and \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/02/03/california-foundation-for-science-and-health-research-bond-ballot-measure\">inviting lawmakers to a science fair\u003c/a> highlighting projects that had seen their funding stalled or canceled by the federal government.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>There were plenty to choose from: The Trump administration \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/education/higher-education/2026/07/research-grants-california-2/\">canceled nearly $2 billion in research grants to the University of California beginning in early 2025\u003c/a>, later acknowledging in court that officials searched for keywords such as “health equity” and “sexual orientation” in order to decide what to cut. While a court order restored much of the money, the National Science Foundation has since \u003ca href=\"https://www.insidehighered.com/news/government/science-research-policy/2026/09/21/nsf-over-billion-behind-grants-ies-says-will\">slowed grantmaking nationwide\u003c/a>, and President Trump has \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/23/us/politics/trump-nih-science-grants.html\">proposed giving political appointees more power to veto National Institutes of Health grants\u003c/a> that don’t align with his agenda.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>There were plenty to choose from: The Trump administration \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/education/higher-education/2026/07/research-grants-california-2/\">canceled nearly $2 billion in research grants to the University of California beginning in early 2025\u003c/a>, later acknowledging in court that officials searched for keywords such as “health equity” and “sexual orientation” in order to decide what to cut. While a court order restored much of the money, the National Science Foundation has since \u003ca href=\"https://www.insidehighered.com/news/government/science-research-policy/2026/09/21/nsf-over-billion-behind-grants-ies-says-will\">slowed grantmaking nationwide\u003c/a>, and President Trump has \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/23/us/politics/trump-nih-science-grants.html\">proposed giving political appointees more power to veto National Institutes of Health grants\u003c/a> that don’t align with his agenda.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "kqed-v2/related-articles",
"attrs": {
"postIds": [
"news_12097934"
],
"label": "Related Articles",
"maxPosts": 1,
"showImages": false,
"heroImage": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/03/250307-BERKELEY-SCIENCE-PROTEST-MD-01-KQED_1-1920x1280.jpg",
"query": "",
"labelWasCleared": false,
"heroImageAlt": "",
"heroImageLink": "",
"labelLink": "",
"alignment": "right",
"target": "_self",
"manualLinks": [],
"posts": []
},
"innerHTML": "",
"innerContent": [],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>This spring, the National Science Foundation \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/05/08/donald-trump-uc-berkeley-research-grants-national-science-foundation\">canceled an additional $21 million in grants to UC Berkeley\u003c/a>, accusing the projects’ lead researchers of accepting foreign funding without disclosing it, a charge some of those scientists denied. UC President James Milliken has called the disruption of federal research funding “one of the gravest threats to the University of California in our 157-year history.”\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>This spring, the National Science Foundation \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/05/08/donald-trump-uc-berkeley-research-grants-national-science-foundation\">canceled an additional $21 million in grants to UC Berkeley\u003c/a>, accusing the projects’ lead researchers of accepting foreign funding without disclosing it, a charge some of those scientists denied. UC President James Milliken has called the disruption of federal research funding “one of the gravest threats to the University of California in our 157-year history.”\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Lawmakers nevertheless declined to move the science bond forward this spring amid worries about competing demands on state funds – including a housing bond on the November ballot and the possible need to backfill other federal cuts. But negotiations among bill supporters, legislative leaders and the governor over the summer led to the scaled-down version that Newsom signed Wednesday.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Lawmakers nevertheless declined to move the science bond forward this spring amid worries about competing demands on state funds – including a housing bond on the November ballot and the possible need to backfill other federal cuts. But negotiations among bill supporters, legislative leaders and the governor over the summer led to the scaled-down version that Newsom signed Wednesday.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>Along with the University of California, California State University, private universities, and independent labs would all be potentially eligible for grants from the new state fund. A $7.5 billion state fund would not by itself make up for the instability in federal grants – the UC alone \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5143\">received nearly $5 billion in federal research funding in fiscal year 2024-25\u003c/a>. But supporters say it could be especially helpful to researchers in fields such as climate science that are critical to the state’s future but have run afoul of Trump administration priorities.\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>Along with the University of California, California State University, private universities, and independent labs would all be potentially eligible for grants from the new state fund. A $7.5 billion state fund would not by itself make up for the instability in federal grants – the UC alone \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5143\">received nearly $5 billion in federal research funding in fiscal year 2024-25\u003c/a>. But supporters say it could be especially helpful to researchers in fields such as climate science that are critical to the state’s future but have run afoul of Trump administration priorities.\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
},
{
"blockName": "core/paragraph",
"attrs": {
"dropCap": false
},
"innerHTML": "\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Berkeleyside partners with the nonprofit newsroom \u003ca href=\"https://www.opencampus.org/\">Open Campus\u003c/a> on higher education coverage.\u003c/em> \u003cem>This story was originally published by \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/\">Berkeleyside\u003c/a> and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n",
"innerContent": [
"\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Berkeleyside partners with the nonprofit newsroom \u003ca href=\"https://www.opencampus.org/\">Open Campus\u003c/a> on higher education coverage.\u003c/em> \u003cem>This story was originally published by \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/\">Berkeleyside\u003c/a> and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n"
],
"innerBlocks": []
}
],
"excerpt": "Voters will get to weigh in on the plan in early 2028. ",
"status": "publish",
"parent": 0,
"modified": 1791156921,
"stats": {
"hasAudio": false,
"hasVideo": false,
"hasChartOrMap": false,
"iframeSrcs": [],
"hasGoogleForm": false,
"hasGallery": false,
"hasHearkenModule": false,
"hasPolis": false,
"paragraphCount": 11,
"wordCount": 723
},
"headData": {
"title": "$7.5B California Science Agency Plan Free From Trump’s Influence Will Go to Voters | KQED",
"description": "Voters will get to weigh in on the plan in early 2028. ",
"ogTitle": "",
"ogDescription": "",
"ogImgId": "",
"twTitle": "",
"twDescription": "",
"twImgId": "",
"schema": {
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "NewsArticle",
"headline": "$7.5B California Science Agency Plan Free From Trump’s Influence Will Go to Voters",
"datePublished": "2026-10-05T09:00:00-07:00",
"dateModified": "2026-10-04T16:35:21-07:00",
"image": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"isAccessibleForFree": "True",
"publisher": {
"@type": "NewsMediaOrganization",
"@id": "https://www.kqed.org/#organization",
"name": "KQED",
"logo": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"url": "https://www.kqed.org",
"sameAs": [
"https://www.facebook.com/KQED",
"https://twitter.com/KQED",
"https://www.instagram.com/kqed/",
"https://www.tiktok.com/@kqedofficial",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/kqed",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeC0IOo7i1P_61zVUWbJ4nw"
]
}
}
},
"primaryCategory": {
"termId": 31795,
"slug": "california",
"name": "California"
},
"sticky": false,
"nprByline": "Felicia Mello, Berkeleyside",
"templateType": "standard",
"featuredImageType": "standard",
"excludeFromSiteSearch": "Include",
"showOnAuthorArchivePages": "No",
"articleAge": "0",
"path": "/news/12102760/7-5b-california-science-agency-plan-free-from-trumps-influence-will-go-to-voters",
"audioTrackLength": null,
"parsedContent": [
{
"type": "contentString",
"content": "\u003cdiv class=\"post-body\">\u003cp>\n\u003cp>\u003ca href=\"https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/california\">California \u003c/a>could create its own multi-billion-dollar science and health research agency under a bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last Wednesday, helping to fill a gap left by the politicization of science under the second Trump administration. Voters will decide in a year and a half whether to fund the idea, which the University of California has championed.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Approved by state lawmakers at a time when federal science funding has become increasingly unpredictable, \u003ca href=\"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB895\">the bill places a $7.5 billion bond measure on the March 2028 ballot\u003c/a> to pay for the creation of the California Foundation for Science and Health Research. The new state agency would provide grants and loans for projects in public health, climate science, agriculture and other areas. Panels of scientists would review proposals, and the agency would develop rules allowing the state to share in some of the profits from inventions made with its support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cfigure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\">\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"2000\" height=\"1333\" src=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-12027563\" srcset=\"https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL.jpg 2000w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-800x533.jpg 800w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1020x680.jpg 1020w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-160x107.jpg 160w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/02/250218-SFDowntown-04-BL-1920x1280.jpg 1920w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2000px) 100vw, 2000px\" />\u003cfigcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Sen. Scott Wiener speaks during a press conference announcing legislation to increase nightlife in Downtown San Francisco to help the recovery of the neighborhood, in Union Square, San Francisco, on Feb. 18, 2025. Wiener is the author of the $7.5B proposal. (Beth LaBerge/KQED)\u003c/figcaption>\u003c/figure>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>“Scientific advancements are curing and preventing diseases, improving the lives of people living with chronic conditions, protecting our communities from wildfires, lowering the cost of food, and powering our economy,” the bill’s author, state Sen. Scott Wiener, said in a statement. “We cannot allow the federal government to throw away that hope for a better future.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Newsom joined Wiener to sign the bill atop the Golden Gate Bridge, a landmark built with voter-approved bond money in the 1930s that his press office described as a symbol of California ingenuity. He said the proposed science agency “does the opposite of what Donald Trump is doing (and) will allow us to double down on what makes this state great.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>It was a dramatic comeback for a measure that \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/06/29/12b-science-bond-to-offset-trump-research-cuts-misses-california-ballot-deadline\">almost died in the Legislature earlier this year\u003c/a>, when a more ambitious $23 billion version of the plan failed to make it onto the November ballot despite bipartisan support.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Researchers from UC Berkeley and elsewhere had joined with UC leadership to lobby for the bond, hosting rallies and \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/02/03/california-foundation-for-science-and-health-research-bond-ballot-measure\">inviting lawmakers to a science fair\u003c/a> highlighting projects that had seen their funding stalled or canceled by the federal government.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>There were plenty to choose from: The Trump administration \u003ca href=\"https://calmatters.org/education/higher-education/2026/07/research-grants-california-2/\">canceled nearly $2 billion in research grants to the University of California beginning in early 2025\u003c/a>, later acknowledging in court that officials searched for keywords such as “health equity” and “sexual orientation” in order to decide what to cut. While a court order restored much of the money, the National Science Foundation has since \u003ca href=\"https://www.insidehighered.com/news/government/science-research-policy/2026/09/21/nsf-over-billion-behind-grants-ies-says-will\">slowed grantmaking nationwide\u003c/a>, and President Trump has \u003ca href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/23/us/politics/trump-nih-science-grants.html\">proposed giving political appointees more power to veto National Institutes of Health grants\u003c/a> that don’t align with his agenda.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\u003cp>This spring, the National Science Foundation \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/2026/05/08/donald-trump-uc-berkeley-research-grants-national-science-foundation\">canceled an additional $21 million in grants to UC Berkeley\u003c/a>, accusing the projects’ lead researchers of accepting foreign funding without disclosing it, a charge some of those scientists denied. UC President James Milliken has called the disruption of federal research funding “one of the gravest threats to the University of California in our 157-year history.”\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Lawmakers nevertheless declined to move the science bond forward this spring amid worries about competing demands on state funds – including a housing bond on the November ballot and the possible need to backfill other federal cuts. But negotiations among bill supporters, legislative leaders and the governor over the summer led to the scaled-down version that Newsom signed Wednesday.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>Along with the University of California, California State University, private universities, and independent labs would all be potentially eligible for grants from the new state fund. A $7.5 billion state fund would not by itself make up for the instability in federal grants – the UC alone \u003ca href=\"https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5143\">received nearly $5 billion in federal research funding in fiscal year 2024-25\u003c/a>. But supporters say it could be especially helpful to researchers in fields such as climate science that are critical to the state’s future but have run afoul of Trump administration priorities.\u003c/p>\n\n\n\n\u003cp>\u003cem>Berkeleyside partners with the nonprofit newsroom \u003ca href=\"https://www.opencampus.org/\">Open Campus\u003c/a> on higher education coverage.\u003c/em> \u003cem>This story was originally published by \u003ca href=\"https://www.berkeleyside.org/\">Berkeleyside\u003c/a> and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.\u003c/em>\u003c/p>\n\u003c/div>\u003c/p>",
"attributes": {
"named": {},
"numeric": []
}
}
],
"link": "/news/12102760/7-5b-california-science-agency-plan-free-from-trumps-influence-will-go-to-voters",
"authors": [
"byline_news_12102760"
],
"categories": [
"news_31795",
"news_8",
"news_13",
"news_356"
],
"tags": [
"news_18538",
"news_27626",
"news_36059",
"news_3187",
"news_23282"
],
"affiliates": [
"news_5078"
],
"featImg": "news_12099020",
"label": "news_5078"
}
},
"podcastsReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": false,
"podcasts": {}
},
"radioProgramsReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": false,
"radioPrograms": {}
},
"radioSearchSegmentsReducer": {},
"programsReducer": {
"all-things-considered": {
"id": "all-things-considered",
"title": "All Things Considered",
"info": "Every weekday, \u003cem>All Things Considered\u003c/em> hosts Robert Siegel, Audie Cornish, Ari Shapiro, and Kelly McEvers present the program's trademark mix of news, interviews, commentaries, reviews, and offbeat features. Michel Martin hosts on the weekends.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 1pm-2pm, 4:30pm-6:30pm\u003cbr />SAT-SUN 5pm-6pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/All-Things-Considered-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/all-things-considered/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/all-things-considered"
},
"american-suburb-podcast": {
"id": "american-suburb-podcast",
"title": "American Suburb: The Podcast",
"tagline": "The flip side of gentrification, told through one town",
"info": "Gentrification is changing cities across America, forcing people from neighborhoods they have long called home. Call them the displaced. Now those priced out of the Bay Area are looking for a better life in an unlikely place. American Suburb follows this migration to one California town along the Delta, 45 miles from San Francisco. But is this once sleepy suburb ready for them?",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/American-Suburb-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/news/series/american-suburb-podcast",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 19
},
"link": "/news/series/american-suburb-podcast/",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/RBrW",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?mt=2&id=1287748328",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/American-Suburb-p1086805/",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/series/american-suburb-podcast/feed/podcast",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkMzMDExODgxNjA5"
}
},
"baycurious": {
"id": "baycurious",
"title": "Bay Curious",
"tagline": "Exploring the Bay Area, one question at a time",
"info": "KQED’s new podcast, Bay Curious, gets to the bottom of the mysteries — both profound and peculiar — that give the Bay Area its unique identity. And we’ll do it with your help! You ask the questions. You decide what Bay Curious investigates. And you join us on the journey to find the answers.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Bay-Curious-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Bay Curious",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/news/series/baycurious",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 3
},
"link": "/podcasts/baycurious",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bay-curious/id1172473406",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/500557090/bay-curious",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/category/bay-curious-podcast/feed/podcast",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9a90d476-aa04-455d-9a4c-0871ed6216d4/bay-curious",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/bay-curious",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/6O76IdmhixfijmhTZLIJ8k"
}
},
"bbc-world-service": {
"id": "bbc-world-service",
"title": "BBC World Service",
"info": "The day's top stories from BBC News compiled twice daily in the week, once at weekends.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 9pm-10pm, TUE-FRI 1am-2am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/BBC-World-Service-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_world_service",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "BBC World Service"
},
"link": "/radio/program/bbc-world-service",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/global-news-podcast/id135067274?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/BBC-World-Service-p455581/",
"rss": "https://podcasts.files.bbci.co.uk/p02nq0gn.rss"
}
},
"californiareport": {
"id": "californiareport",
"title": "The California Report",
"tagline": "California, day by day",
"info": "KQED’s statewide radio news program providing daily coverage of issues, trends and public policy decisions.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-California-Report-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The California Report",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/californiareport",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 8
},
"link": "/californiareport",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/kqeds-the-california-report/id79681292",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/26099305-72af-4542-9dde-ac1807fe36d5/kqed-s-the-california-report",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432285393/the-california-report",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqedfm-kqeds-the-california-report-podcast-8838",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/tcram/feed/podcast"
}
},
"californiareportmagazine": {
"id": "californiareportmagazine",
"title": "The California Report Magazine",
"tagline": "Your state, your stories",
"info": "Every week, The California Report Magazine takes you on a road trip for the ears: to visit the places and meet the people who make California unique. The in-depth storytelling podcast from the California Report.",
"airtime": "FRI 4:30pm-5pm, 6:30pm-7pm, 11pm-11:30pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-California-Report-Magazine-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The California Report Magazine",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/californiareportmagazine",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 10
},
"link": "/californiareportmagazine",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-california-report-magazine/id1314750545",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM3NjkwNjk1OTAz",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/564733126/the-california-report-magazine",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-california-report-magazine",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/tcrmag/feed/podcast"
}
},
"city-arts": {
"id": "city-arts",
"title": "City Arts & Lectures",
"info": "A one-hour radio program to hear celebrated writers, artists and thinkers address contemporary ideas and values, often discussing the creative process. Please note: tapes or transcripts are not available",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/cityartsandlecture-300x300.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.cityarts.net/",
"airtime": "SUN 1pm-2pm, TUE 10pm, WED 1am",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "City Arts & Lectures"
},
"link": "https://www.cityarts.net",
"subscribe": {
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/City-Arts-and-Lectures-p692/",
"rss": "https://www.cityarts.net/feed/"
}
},
"closealltabs": {
"id": "closealltabs",
"title": "Close All Tabs",
"tagline": "Your irreverent guide to the trends redefining our world",
"info": "Close All Tabs breaks down how digital culture shapes our world through thoughtful insights and irreverent humor.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/CAT_2_Tile-scaled.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Close All Tabs",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/closealltabs",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 1
},
"link": "/podcasts/closealltabs",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/close-all-tabs/id214663465",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC6993880386",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/92d9d4ac-67a3-4eed-b10a-fb45d45b1ef2/close-all-tabs",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/6LAJFHnGK1pYXYzv6SIol6?si=deb0cae19813417c"
}
},
"code-switch-life-kit": {
"id": "code-switch-life-kit",
"title": "Code Switch / Life Kit",
"info": "\u003cem>Code Switch\u003c/em>, which listeners will hear in the first part of the hour, has fearless and much-needed conversations about race. Hosted by journalists of color, the show tackles the subject of race head-on, exploring how it impacts every part of society — from politics and pop culture to history, sports and more.\u003cbr />\u003cbr />\u003cem>Life Kit\u003c/em>, which will be in the second part of the hour, guides you through spaces and feelings no one prepares you for — from finances to mental health, from workplace microaggressions to imposter syndrome, from relationships to parenting. The show features experts with real world experience and shares their knowledge. Because everyone needs a little help being human.\u003cbr />\u003cbr />\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510312/codeswitch\">\u003cem>Code Switch\u003c/em> offical site and podcast\u003c/a>\u003cbr />\u003ca href=\"https://www.npr.org/lifekit\">\u003cem>Life Kit\u003c/em> offical site and podcast\u003c/a>\u003cbr />",
"airtime": "SUN 9pm-10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Code-Switch-Life-Kit-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/code-switch-life-kit",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/1112190608?mt=2&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnByLm9yZy9yc3MvcG9kY2FzdC5waHA_aWQ9NTEwMzEy",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3bExJ9JQpkwNhoHvaIIuyV",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510312/podcast.xml"
}
},
"commonwealth-club": {
"id": "commonwealth-club",
"title": "Commonwealth Club of California Podcast",
"info": "The Commonwealth Club of California is the nation's oldest and largest public affairs forum. As a non-partisan forum, The Club brings to the public airwaves diverse viewpoints on important topics. The Club's weekly radio broadcast - the oldest in the U.S., dating back to 1924 - is carried across the nation on public radio stations and is now podcasting. Our website archive features audio of our recent programs, as well as selected speeches from our long and distinguished history. This podcast feed is usually updated twice a week and is always un-edited.",
"airtime": "THU 10pm, FRI 1am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Commonwealth-Club-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.commonwealthclub.org/podcasts",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "Commonwealth Club of California"
},
"link": "/radio/program/commonwealth-club",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/commonwealth-club-of-california-podcast/id976334034?mt=2",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5jb21tb253ZWFsdGhjbHViLm9yZy9hdWRpby9wb2RjYXN0L3dlZWtseS54bWw",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Commonwealth-Club-of-California-p1060/"
}
},
"forum": {
"id": "forum",
"title": "Forum",
"tagline": "The conversation starts here",
"info": "KQED’s live call-in program discussing local, state, national and international issues, as well as in-depth interviews.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 9am-11am, 10pm-11pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Forum-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Forum with Mina Kim and Alexis Madrigal",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/forum",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 9
},
"link": "/forum",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/kqeds-forum/id73329719",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM5NTU3MzgxNjMz",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432307980/forum",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqedfm-kqeds-forum-podcast",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC9557381633"
}
},
"freakonomics-radio": {
"id": "freakonomics-radio",
"title": "Freakonomics Radio",
"info": "Freakonomics Radio is a one-hour award-winning podcast and public-radio project hosted by Stephen Dubner, with co-author Steve Levitt as a regular guest. It is produced in partnership with WNYC.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/05/freakonomicsRadio.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://freakonomics.com/",
"airtime": "SUN 1am-2am, SAT 3pm-4pm",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/freakonomics-radio",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/4s8b",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/freakonomics-radio/id354668519",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/WNYC-Podcasts/Freakonomics-Radio-p272293/",
"rss": "https://feeds.feedburner.com/freakonomicsradio"
}
},
"fresh-air": {
"id": "fresh-air",
"title": "Fresh Air",
"info": "Hosted by Terry Gross, \u003cem>Fresh Air from WHYY\u003c/em> is the Peabody Award-winning weekday magazine of contemporary arts and issues. One of public radio's most popular programs, Fresh Air features intimate conversations with today's biggest luminaries.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 7pm-8pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Fresh-Air-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/fresh-air/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/fresh-air",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/4s8b",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=214089682&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Fresh-Air-p17/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/381444908/podcast.xml"
}
},
"here-and-now": {
"id": "here-and-now",
"title": "Here & Now",
"info": "A live production of NPR and WBUR Boston, in collaboration with stations across the country, Here & Now reflects the fluid world of news as it's happening in the middle of the day, with timely, in-depth news, interviews and conversation. Hosted by Robin Young, Jeremy Hobson and Tonya Mosley.",
"airtime": "MON-THU 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Here-And-Now-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/here-and-now",
"subsdcribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?mt=2&id=426698661",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Here--Now-p211/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510051/podcast.xml"
}
},
"hidden-brain": {
"id": "hidden-brain",
"title": "Hidden Brain",
"info": "Shankar Vedantam uses science and storytelling to reveal the unconscious patterns that drive human behavior, shape our choices and direct our relationships.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/05/hiddenbrain.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/series/423302056/hidden-brain",
"airtime": "SUN 7pm-8pm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "NPR"
},
"link": "/radio/program/hidden-brain",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/hidden-brain/id1028908750?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Science-Podcasts/Hidden-Brain-p787503/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510308/podcast.xml"
}
},
"how-i-built-this": {
"id": "how-i-built-this",
"title": "How I Built This with Guy Raz",
"info": "Guy Raz dives into the stories behind some of the world's best known companies. How I Built This weaves a narrative journey about innovators, entrepreneurs and idealists—and the movements they built.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/05/howIBuiltThis.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/how-i-built-this",
"airtime": "SUN 7:30pm-8pm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/how-i-built-this",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/3zxy",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/how-i-built-this-with-guy-raz/id1150510297?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Arts--Culture-Podcasts/How-I-Built-This-p910896/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510313/podcast.xml"
}
},
"hyphenacion": {
"id": "hyphenacion",
"title": "Hyphenación",
"tagline": "Where conversation and cultura meet",
"info": "What kind of no sabo word is Hyphenación? For us, it’s about living within a hyphenation. Like being a third-gen Mexican-American from the Texas border now living that Bay Area Chicano life. Like Xorje! Each week we bring together a couple of hyphenated Latinos to talk all about personal life choices: family, careers, relationships, belonging … everything is on the table. ",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Hyphenacion_FinalAssets_PodcastTile.png",
"imageAlt": "KQED Hyphenación",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/hyphenacion",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 15
},
"link": "/podcasts/hyphenacion",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hyphenaci%C3%B3n/id1191591838",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/2p3Fifq96nw9BPcmFdIq0o?si=39209f7b25774f38",
"youtube": "https://www.youtube.com/c/kqedarts",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/6c3dd23c-93fb-4aab-97ba-1725fa6315f1/hyphenaci%C3%B3n",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC2275451163"
}
},
"jerrybrown": {
"id": "jerrybrown",
"title": "The Political Mind of Jerry Brown",
"tagline": "Lessons from a lifetime in politics",
"info": "The Political Mind of Jerry Brown brings listeners the wisdom of the former Governor, Mayor, and presidential candidate. Scott Shafer interviewed Brown for more than 40 hours, covering the former governor's life and half-century in the political game – and Brown has some lessons he'd like to share. ",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Political-Mind-of-Jerry-Brown-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Political Mind of Jerry Brown",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/jerrybrown",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 18
},
"link": "/podcasts/jerrybrown",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/790253322/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1492194549",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/series/jerrybrown/feed/podcast/",
"tuneIn": "http://tun.in/pjGcK",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/54C1dmuyFyKMFttY6X2j6r?si=K8SgRCoISNK6ZbjpXrX5-w",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/44420f75-3b0e-4301-ab3b-16da6b09e543/the-political-mind-of-jerry-brown"
}
},
"latino-usa": {
"id": "latino-usa",
"title": "Latino USA",
"airtime": "MON 1am-2am, SUN 6pm-7pm",
"info": "Latino USA, the radio journal of news and culture, is the only national, English-language radio program produced from a Latino perspective.",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/latinoUsa.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://latinousa.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/latino-usa",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/xtTd",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=79681317&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Latino-USA-p621/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510016/podcast.xml"
}
},
"marketplace": {
"id": "marketplace",
"title": "Marketplace",
"info": "Our flagship program, helmed by Kai Ryssdal, examines what the day in money delivered, through stories, conversations, newsworthy numbers and more. Updated Monday through Friday at about 3:30 p.m. PT.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 4pm-4:30pm, MON-WED 6:30pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Marketplace-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.marketplace.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "American Public Media"
},
"link": "/radio/program/marketplace",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=201853034&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/APM-Marketplace-p88/",
"rss": "https://feeds.publicradio.org/public_feeds/marketplace-pm/rss/rss"
}
},
"masters-of-scale": {
"id": "masters-of-scale",
"title": "Masters of Scale",
"info": "Masters of Scale is an original podcast in which LinkedIn co-founder and Greylock Partner Reid Hoffman sets out to describe and prove theories that explain how great entrepreneurs take their companies from zero to a gazillion in ingenious fashion.",
"airtime": "Every other Wednesday June 12 through October 16 at 8pm (repeats Thursdays at 2am)",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Masters-of-Scale-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://mastersofscale.com/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "WaitWhat"
},
"link": "/radio/program/masters-of-scale",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "http://mastersofscale.app.link/",
"rss": "https://rss.art19.com/masters-of-scale"
}
},
"mindshift": {
"id": "mindshift",
"title": "MindShift",
"tagline": "A podcast about the future of learning and how we raise our kids",
"info": "The MindShift podcast explores the innovations in education that are shaping how kids learn. Hosts Ki Sung and Katrina Schwartz introduce listeners to educators, researchers, parents and students who are developing effective ways to improve how kids learn. We cover topics like how fed-up administrators are developing surprising tactics to deal with classroom disruptions; how listening to podcasts are helping kids develop reading skills; the consequences of overparenting; and why interdisciplinary learning can engage students on all ends of the traditional achievement spectrum. This podcast is part of the MindShift education site, a division of KQED News. KQED is an NPR/PBS member station based in San Francisco. You can also visit the MindShift website for episodes and supplemental blog posts or tweet us \u003ca href=\"https://twitter.com/MindShiftKQED\">@MindShiftKQED\u003c/a> or visit us at \u003ca href=\"/mindshift\">MindShift.KQED.org\u003c/a>",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Mindshift-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED MindShift: How We Will Learn",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/mindshift/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 12
},
"link": "/podcasts/mindshift",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mindshift-podcast/id1078765985",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkM1NzY0NjAwNDI5",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/464615685/mind-shift-podcast",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/stories-teachers-share",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/0MxSpNYZKNprFLCl7eEtyx"
}
},
"morning-edition": {
"id": "morning-edition",
"title": "Morning Edition",
"info": "\u003cem>Morning Edition\u003c/em> takes listeners around the country and the world with multi-faceted stories and commentaries every weekday. Hosts Steve Inskeep, David Greene and Rachel Martin bring you the latest breaking news and features to prepare you for the day.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 3am-9am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Morning-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/morning-edition/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/morning-edition"
},
"onourwatch": {
"id": "onourwatch",
"title": "On Our Watch",
"tagline": "Deeply-reported investigative journalism",
"info": "For decades, the process for how police police themselves has been inconsistent – if not opaque. In some states, like California, these proceedings were completely hidden. After a new police transparency law unsealed scores of internal affairs files, our reporters set out to examine these cases and the shadow world of police discipline. On Our Watch brings listeners into the rooms where officers are questioned and witnesses are interrogated to find out who this system is really protecting. Is it the officers, or the public they've sworn to serve?",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/On-Our-Watch-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "On Our Watch from NPR and KQED",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/onourwatch",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 11
},
"link": "/podcasts/onourwatch",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1567098962",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5ucHIub3JnLzUxMDM2MC9wb2RjYXN0LnhtbD9zYz1nb29nbGVwb2RjYXN0cw",
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/onourwatch",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/0OLWoyizopu6tY1XiuX70x",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/On-Our-Watch-p1436229/",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/show/on-our-watch",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510360/podcast.xml"
}
},
"on-the-media": {
"id": "on-the-media",
"title": "On The Media",
"info": "Our weekly podcast explores how the media 'sausage' is made, casts an incisive eye on fluctuations in the marketplace of ideas, and examines threats to the freedom of information and expression in America and abroad. For one hour a week, the show tries to lift the veil from the process of \"making media,\" especially news media, because it's through that lens that we see the world and the world sees us",
"airtime": "SUN 2pm-3pm, MON 12am-1am",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/onTheMedia.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/otm",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "wnyc"
},
"link": "/radio/program/on-the-media",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/on-the-media/id73330715?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/On-the-Media-p69/",
"rss": "http://feeds.wnyc.org/onthemedia"
}
},
"pbs-newshour": {
"id": "pbs-newshour",
"title": "PBS NewsHour",
"info": "Analysis, background reports and updates from the PBS NewsHour putting today's news in context.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 3pm-4pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/PBS-News-Hour-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.pbs.org/newshour/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "pbs"
},
"link": "/radio/program/pbs-newshour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/pbs-newshour-full-show/id394432287?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/PBS-NewsHour---Full-Show-p425698/",
"rss": "https://www.pbs.org/newshour/feeds/rss/podcasts/show"
}
},
"perspectives": {
"id": "perspectives",
"title": "Perspectives",
"tagline": "KQED's series of daily listener commentaries since 1991",
"info": "KQED's series of daily listener commentaries since 1991.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Perspectives_Tile_Final.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Perspectives",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/perspectives/",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 14
},
"link": "/perspectives",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/id73801135",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/432309616/perspectives",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/perspectives/category/perspectives/feed/",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly93dzIua3FlZC5vcmcvcGVyc3BlY3RpdmVzL2NhdGVnb3J5L3BlcnNwZWN0aXZlcy9mZWVkLw"
}
},
"planet-money": {
"id": "planet-money",
"title": "Planet Money",
"info": "The economy explained. Imagine you could call up a friend and say, Meet me at the bar and tell me what's going on with the economy. Now imagine that's actually a fun evening.",
"airtime": "SUN 3pm-4pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/planetmoney.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/sections/money/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/planet-money",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/M4f5",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/planet-money/id290783428?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/Business--Economics-Podcasts/Planet-Money-p164680/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510289/podcast.xml"
}
},
"politicalbreakdown": {
"id": "politicalbreakdown",
"title": "Political Breakdown",
"tagline": "Politics from a personal perspective",
"info": "Political Breakdown is a new series that explores the political intersection of California and the nation. Each week hosts Scott Shafer and Marisa Lagos are joined with a new special guest to unpack politics -- with personality — and offer an insider’s glimpse at how politics happens.",
"airtime": "THU 6:30pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Political-Breakdown-2024-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Political Breakdown",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/politicalbreakdown",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 5
},
"link": "/podcasts/politicalbreakdown",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/political-breakdown/id1327641087",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/e0c2d153-ad36-4c8d-901d-f1da6a724824/political-breakdown",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/572155894/political-breakdown",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/political-breakdown",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/07RVyIjIdk2WDuVehvBMoN",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/tag/political-breakdown/feed/podcast"
}
},
"possible": {
"id": "possible",
"title": "Possible",
"info": "Possible is hosted by entrepreneur Reid Hoffman and writer Aria Finger. Together in Possible, Hoffman and Finger lead enlightening discussions about building a brighter collective future. The show features interviews with visionary guests like Trevor Noah, Sam Altman and Janette Sadik-Khan. Possible paints an optimistic portrait of the world we can create through science, policy, business, art and our shared humanity. It asks: What if everything goes right for once? How can we get there? Each episode also includes a short fiction story generated by advanced AI GPT-4, serving as a thought-provoking springboard to speculate how humanity could leverage technology for good.",
"airtime": "SUN 2pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Possible-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.possible.fm/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "Possible"
},
"link": "/radio/program/possible",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/possible/id1677184070",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/730YpdUSNlMyPQwNnyjp4k"
}
},
"pri-the-world": {
"id": "pri-the-world",
"title": "PRI's The World: Latest Edition",
"info": "Each weekday, host Marco Werman and his team of producers bring you the world's most interesting stories in an hour of radio that reminds us just how small our planet really is.",
"airtime": "MON-FRI 2pm-3pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-World-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.pri.org/programs/the-world",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "PRI"
},
"link": "/radio/program/pri-the-world",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/pris-the-world-latest-edition/id278196007?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Politics-Podcasts/PRIs-The-World-p24/",
"rss": "http://feeds.feedburner.com/pri/theworld"
}
},
"radiolab": {
"id": "radiolab",
"title": "Radiolab",
"info": "A two-time Peabody Award-winner, Radiolab is an investigation told through sounds and stories, and centered around one big idea. In the Radiolab world, information sounds like music and science and culture collide. Hosted by Jad Abumrad and Robert Krulwich, the show is designed for listeners who demand skepticism, but appreciate wonder. WNYC Studios is the producer of other leading podcasts including Freakonomics Radio, Death, Sex & Money, On the Media and many more.",
"airtime": "SUN 12am-1am, SAT 2pm-3pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/radiolab1400.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/radiolab/",
"meta": {
"site": "science",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/radiolab",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/radiolab/id152249110?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/RadioLab-p68032/",
"rss": "https://feeds.wnyc.org/radiolab"
}
},
"reveal": {
"id": "reveal",
"title": "Reveal",
"info": "Created by The Center for Investigative Reporting and PRX, Reveal is public radios first one-hour weekly radio show and podcast dedicated to investigative reporting. Credible, fact based and without a partisan agenda, Reveal combines the power and artistry of driveway moment storytelling with data-rich reporting on critically important issues. The result is stories that inform and inspire, arming our listeners with information to right injustices, hold the powerful accountable and improve lives.Reveal is hosted by Al Letson and showcases the award-winning work of CIR and newsrooms large and small across the nation. In a radio and podcast market crowded with choices, Reveal focuses on important and often surprising stories that illuminate the world for our listeners.",
"airtime": "SAT 4pm-5pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/reveal300px.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/reveal",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/reveal/id886009669",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Reveal-p679597/",
"rss": "http://feeds.revealradio.org/revealpodcast"
}
},
"rightnowish": {
"id": "rightnowish",
"title": "Rightnowish",
"tagline": "Art is where you find it",
"info": "Rightnowish digs into life in the Bay Area right now… ish. Journalist Pendarvis Harshaw takes us to galleries painted on the sides of liquor stores in West Oakland. We'll dance in warehouses in the Bayview, make smoothies with kids in South Berkeley, and listen to classical music in a 1984 Cutlass Supreme in Richmond. Every week, Pen talks to movers and shakers about how the Bay Area shapes what they create, and how they shape the place we call home.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Rightnowish-Podcast-Tile-500x500-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Rightnowish with Pendarvis Harshaw",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/rightnowish",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 16
},
"link": "/podcasts/rightnowish",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/721590300/rightnowish",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/arts/programs/rightnowish/feed/podcast",
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rightnowish/id1482187648",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/rightnowish",
"google": "https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGhvbmUuZm0vS1FJTkMxMjU5MTY3NDc4",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/7kEJuafTzTVan7B78ttz1I"
}
},
"science-friday": {
"id": "science-friday",
"title": "Science Friday",
"info": "Science Friday is a weekly science talk show, broadcast live over public radio stations nationwide. Each week, the show focuses on science topics that are in the news and tries to bring an educated, balanced discussion to bear on the scientific issues at hand. Panels of expert guests join host Ira Flatow, a veteran science journalist, to discuss science and to take questions from listeners during the call-in portion of the program.",
"airtime": "FRI 11am-1pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Science-Friday-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/science-friday",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/science-friday",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=73329284&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Science-Friday-p394/",
"rss": "http://feeds.wnyc.org/science-friday"
}
},
"snap-judgment": {
"id": "snap-judgment",
"title": "Snap Judgment",
"tagline": "Real stories with killer beats",
"info": "The Snap Judgment radio show and podcast mixes real stories with killer beats to produce cinematic, dramatic radio. Snap's musical brand of storytelling dares listeners to see the world through the eyes of another. This is storytelling... with a BEAT!! Snap first aired on public radio stations nationwide in July 2010. Today, Snap Judgment airs on over 450 public radio stations and is brought to the airwaves by KQED & PRX.",
"airtime": "SAT 1pm-2pm, 9pm-10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Snap-Judgment-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Snap Judgment",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://snapjudgment.org",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 4
},
"link": "https://snapjudgment.org",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/snap-judgment/id283657561",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/449018144/snap-judgment",
"stitcher": "https://www.pandora.com/podcast/snap-judgment/PC:241?source=stitcher-sunset",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3Cct7ZWmxHNAtLgBTqjC5v",
"rss": "https://snap.feed.snapjudgment.org/"
}
},
"soldout": {
"id": "soldout",
"title": "SOLD OUT: Rethinking Housing in America",
"tagline": "A new future for housing",
"info": "Sold Out: Rethinking Housing in America",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Sold-Out-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Sold Out: Rethinking Housing in America",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/soldout",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 13
},
"link": "/podcasts/soldout",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/911586047/s-o-l-d-o-u-t-a-new-future-for-housing",
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/introducing-sold-out-rethinking-housing-in-america/id1531354937",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/soldout",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/38dTBSk2ISFoPiyYNoKn1X",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/sold-out-rethinking-housing-in-america",
"tunein": "https://tunein.com/radio/SOLD-OUT-Rethinking-Housing-in-America-p1365871/"
}
},
"spooked": {
"id": "spooked",
"title": "Spooked",
"tagline": "True-life supernatural stories",
"info": "",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Spooked-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED Spooked",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://spookedpodcast.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 7
},
"link": "https://spookedpodcast.org/",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/spooked/id1279361017",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/549547848/snap-judgment-presents-spooked",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/76571Rfl3m7PLJQZKQIGCT",
"rss": "https://feeds.simplecast.com/TBotaapn"
}
},
"tech-nation": {
"id": "tech-nation",
"title": "Tech Nation Radio Podcast",
"info": "Tech Nation is a weekly public radio program, hosted by Dr. Moira Gunn. Founded in 1993, it has grown from a simple interview show to a multi-faceted production, featuring conversations with noted technology and science leaders, and a weekly science and technology-related commentary.",
"airtime": "FRI 10pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Tech-Nation-Radio-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "http://technation.podomatic.com/",
"meta": {
"site": "science",
"source": "Tech Nation Media"
},
"link": "/radio/program/tech-nation",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://technation.podomatic.com/rss2.xml"
}
},
"ted-radio-hour": {
"id": "ted-radio-hour",
"title": "TED Radio Hour",
"info": "The TED Radio Hour is a journey through fascinating ideas, astonishing inventions, fresh approaches to old problems, and new ways to think and create.",
"airtime": "SUN 3pm-4pm, SAT 10pm-11pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/tedRadioHour.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/ted-radio-hour/?showDate=2018-06-22",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/ted-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/8vsS",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=523121474&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/TED-Radio-Hour-p418021/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/510298/podcast.xml"
}
},
"thebay": {
"id": "thebay",
"title": "The Bay",
"tagline": "Local news to keep you rooted",
"info": "Host Devin Katayama walks you through the biggest story of the day with reporters and newsmakers.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Bay-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Bay",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/thebay",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 2
},
"link": "/podcasts/thebay",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-bay/id1350043452",
"amazon": "https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/d800ea4c-7a2c-42f2-b861-edaf78a5db0b/the-bay",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/586725995/the-bay",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-bay",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/4BIKBKIujizLHlIlBNaAqQ",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC8259786327"
}
},
"thelatest": {
"id": "thelatest",
"title": "The Latest",
"tagline": "Trusted local news in real time",
"info": "",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/The-Latest-2025-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Latest",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/thelatest",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 6
},
"link": "/thelatest",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-latest-from-kqed/id1197721799",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/1257949365/the-latest-from-k-q-e-d",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/5KIIXMgM9GTi5AepwOYvIZ?si=bd3053fec7244dba",
"rss": "https://feeds.megaphone.fm/KQINC9137121918"
}
},
"theleap": {
"id": "theleap",
"title": "The Leap",
"tagline": "What if you closed your eyes, and jumped?",
"info": "Stories about people making dramatic, risky changes, told by award-winning public radio reporter Judy Campbell.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Leap-Podcast-Tile-703x703-1.jpg",
"imageAlt": "KQED The Leap",
"officialWebsiteLink": "/podcasts/theleap",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "kqed",
"order": 17
},
"link": "/podcasts/theleap",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-leap/id1046668171",
"npr": "https://www.npr.org/podcasts/447248267/the-leap",
"stitcher": "https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/kqed/the-leap",
"spotify": "https://open.spotify.com/show/3sSlVHHzU0ytLwuGs1SD1U",
"rss": "https://ww2.kqed.org/news/programs/the-leap/feed/podcast"
}
},
"the-moth-radio-hour": {
"id": "the-moth-radio-hour",
"title": "The Moth Radio Hour",
"info": "Since its launch in 1997, The Moth has presented thousands of true stories, told live and without notes, to standing-room-only crowds worldwide. Moth storytellers stand alone, under a spotlight, with only a microphone and a roomful of strangers. The storyteller and the audience embark on a high-wire act of shared experience which is both terrifying and exhilarating. Since 2008, The Moth podcast has featured many of our favorite stories told live on Moth stages around the country. For information on all of our programs and live events, visit themoth.org.",
"airtime": "SAT 8pm-9pm and SUN 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/theMoth.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://themoth.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "prx"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-moth-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-moth-podcast/id275699983?mt=2",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/The-Moth-p273888/",
"rss": "http://feeds.themoth.org/themothpodcast"
}
},
"the-new-yorker-radio-hour": {
"id": "the-new-yorker-radio-hour",
"title": "The New Yorker Radio Hour",
"info": "The New Yorker Radio Hour is a weekly program presented by the magazine's editor, David Remnick, and produced by WNYC Studios and The New Yorker. Each episode features a diverse mix of interviews, profiles, storytelling, and an occasional burst of humor inspired by the magazine, and shaped by its writers, artists, and editors. This isn't a radio version of a magazine, but something all its own, reflecting the rich possibilities of audio storytelling and conversation. Theme music for the show was composed and performed by Merrill Garbus of tUnE-YArDs.",
"airtime": "SAT 10am-11am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-New-Yorker-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.wnycstudios.org/shows/tnyradiohour",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "WNYC"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-new-yorker-radio-hour",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1050430296",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/podcasts/WNYC-Podcasts/New-Yorker-Radio-Hour-p803804/",
"rss": "https://feeds.feedburner.com/newyorkerradiohour"
}
},
"the-sam-sanders-show": {
"id": "the-sam-sanders-show",
"title": "The Sam Sanders Show",
"info": "One of public radio's most dynamic voices, Sam Sanders helped launch The NPR Politics Podcast and hosted NPR's hit show It's Been A Minute. Now, the award-winning host returns with something brand new, The Sam Sanders Show. Every week, Sam Sanders and friends dig into the culture that shapes our lives: what's driving the biggest trends, how artists really think, and even the memes you can't stop scrolling past. Sam is beloved for his way of unpacking the world and bringing you up close to fresh currents and engaging conversations. The Sam Sanders Show is smart, funny and always a good time.",
"airtime": "FRI 12-1pm AND SAT 11am-12pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/The-Sam-Sanders-Show-Podcast-Tile-400x400-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.kcrw.com/shows/the-sam-sanders-show/latest",
"meta": {
"site": "arts",
"source": "KCRW"
},
"link": "https://www.kcrw.com/shows/the-sam-sanders-show/latest",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://feed.cdnstream1.com/zjb/feed/download/ac/28/59/ac28594c-e1d0-4231-8728-61865cdc80e8.xml"
}
},
"the-splendid-table": {
"id": "the-splendid-table",
"title": "The Splendid Table",
"info": "\u003cem>The Splendid Table\u003c/em> hosts our nation's conversations about cooking, sustainability and food culture.",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/The-Splendid-Table-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.splendidtable.org/",
"airtime": "SUN 10-11 pm",
"meta": {
"site": "radio",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/the-splendid-table"
},
"this-american-life": {
"id": "this-american-life",
"title": "This American Life",
"info": "This American Life is a weekly public radio show, heard by 2.2 million people on more than 500 stations. Another 2.5 million people download the weekly podcast. It is hosted by Ira Glass, produced in collaboration with Chicago Public Media, delivered to stations by PRX The Public Radio Exchange, and has won all of the major broadcasting awards.",
"airtime": "SAT 12pm-1pm, 7pm-8pm",
"imageSrc": "https://ww2.kqed.org/radio/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/04/thisAmericanLife.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.thisamericanlife.org/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "wbez"
},
"link": "/radio/program/this-american-life",
"subscribe": {
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=201671138&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"rss": "https://www.thisamericanlife.org/podcast/rss.xml"
}
},
"tinydeskradio": {
"id": "tinydeskradio",
"title": "Tiny Desk Radio",
"info": "We're bringing the best of Tiny Desk to the airwaves, only on public radio.",
"airtime": "SUN 8pm and SAT 9pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/300x300-For-Member-Station-Logo-Tiny-Desk-Radio-@2x.png",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/series/g-s1-52030/tiny-desk-radio",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/tinydeskradio",
"subscribe": {
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/g-s1-52030/rss.xml"
}
},
"wait-wait-dont-tell-me": {
"id": "wait-wait-dont-tell-me",
"title": "Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me!",
"info": "Peter Sagal and Bill Kurtis host the weekly NPR News quiz show alongside some of the best and brightest news and entertainment personalities.",
"airtime": "SUN 10am-11am, SAT 11am-12pm, SAT 6pm-7pm",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Wait-Wait-Podcast-Tile-300x300-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/wait-wait-dont-tell-me/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/wait-wait-dont-tell-me",
"subscribe": {
"npr": "https://rpb3r.app.goo.gl/Xogv",
"apple": "https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?s=143441&mt=2&id=121493804&at=11l79Y&ct=nprdirectory",
"tuneIn": "https://tunein.com/radio/Wait-Wait-Dont-Tell-Me-p46/",
"rss": "https://feeds.npr.org/344098539/podcast.xml"
}
},
"weekend-edition-saturday": {
"id": "weekend-edition-saturday",
"title": "Weekend Edition Saturday",
"info": "Weekend Edition Saturday wraps up the week's news and offers a mix of analysis and features on a wide range of topics, including arts, sports, entertainment, and human interest stories. The two-hour program is hosted by NPR's Peabody Award-winning Scott Simon.",
"airtime": "SAT 5am-10am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Weekend-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/weekend-edition-saturday/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/weekend-edition-saturday"
},
"weekend-edition-sunday": {
"id": "weekend-edition-sunday",
"title": "Weekend Edition Sunday",
"info": "Weekend Edition Sunday features interviews with newsmakers, artists, scientists, politicians, musicians, writers, theologians and historians. The program has covered news events from Nelson Mandela's 1990 release from a South African prison to the capture of Saddam Hussein.",
"airtime": "SUN 5am-10am",
"imageSrc": "https://cdn.kqed.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Weekend-Edition-Podcast-Tile-360x360-1.jpg",
"officialWebsiteLink": "https://www.npr.org/programs/weekend-edition-sunday/",
"meta": {
"site": "news",
"source": "npr"
},
"link": "/radio/program/weekend-edition-sunday"
}
},
"racesReducer": {},
"racesGenElectionReducer": {},
"racesGenElection2026Reducer": {},
"racesGenElection2026PresidentialReducer": {},
"radioSchedulesReducer": {},
"listsReducer": {
"posts/news?category=politics": {
"isFetching": false,
"latestQuery": {
"from": 0,
"size": 12
},
"vitalsOnly": false,
"totalRequested": 12,
"isLoading": false,
"isLoadingMore": true,
"total": {
"value": 2617,
"relation": "eq"
},
"items": [
"news_12103398",
"news_12103195",
"news_12103278",
"news_12102140",
"news_12103136",
"news_12102938",
"news_12103028",
"news_12102861",
"news_12101418",
"news_12101275",
"news_12102904",
"news_12102760"
],
"complete": true
}
},
"recallGuideReducer": {
"intros": {},
"policy": {},
"candidates": {}
},
"savedArticleReducer": {
"articles": [],
"status": {}
},
"newslettersReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": false,
"newsletters": {},
"isSubscribing": false,
"isUnsubscribing": false,
"subscribedNewsletters": {}
},
"termsReducer": {
"about": {
"name": "About",
"type": "terms",
"id": "about",
"slug": "about",
"link": "/about",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"arts": {
"name": "Arts & Culture",
"grouping": [
"arts",
"pop",
"trulyca"
],
"description": "KQED Arts provides daily in-depth coverage of the Bay Area's music, art, film, performing arts, literature and arts news, as well as cultural commentary and criticism.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "arts",
"slug": "arts",
"link": "/arts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"artschool": {
"name": "Art School",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "artschool",
"slug": "artschool",
"link": "/artschool",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"bayareabites": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "bayareabites",
"slug": "bayareabites",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"bayareahiphop": {
"name": "Bay Area Hiphop",
"type": "terms",
"id": "bayareahiphop",
"slug": "bayareahiphop",
"link": "/bayareahiphop",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"campaign21": {
"name": "Campaign 21",
"type": "terms",
"id": "campaign21",
"slug": "campaign21",
"link": "/campaign21",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"careers": {
"name": "Careers",
"type": "terms",
"id": "careers",
"slug": "careers",
"link": "/careers",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"checkplease": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "checkplease",
"slug": "checkplease",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"education": {
"name": "Education",
"grouping": [
"education"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "education",
"slug": "education",
"link": "/education",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"elections": {
"name": "Elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "elections",
"slug": "elections",
"link": "/elections",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"events": {
"name": "Events",
"type": "terms",
"id": "events",
"slug": "events",
"link": "/events",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"event": {
"name": "Event",
"alias": "events",
"type": "terms",
"id": "event",
"slug": "event",
"link": "/event",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"filmschoolshorts": {
"name": "Film School Shorts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "filmschoolshorts",
"slug": "filmschoolshorts",
"link": "/filmschoolshorts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"food": {
"name": "KQED food",
"grouping": [
"food",
"bayareabites",
"checkplease"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "food",
"slug": "food",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"forum": {
"name": "Forum",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/forum?",
"parent": "news",
"type": "terms",
"id": "forum",
"slug": "forum",
"link": "/forum",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"futureofyou": {
"name": "Future of You",
"grouping": [
"science",
"futureofyou"
],
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "futureofyou",
"slug": "futureofyou",
"link": "/futureofyou",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"jpepinheart": {
"name": "KQED food",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/food,bayareabites,checkplease",
"parent": "food",
"type": "terms",
"id": "jpepinheart",
"slug": "jpepinheart",
"link": "/food",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"liveblog": {
"name": "Live Blog",
"type": "terms",
"id": "liveblog",
"slug": "liveblog",
"link": "/liveblog",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"livetv": {
"name": "Live TV",
"parent": "tv",
"type": "terms",
"id": "livetv",
"slug": "livetv",
"link": "/livetv",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"lowdown": {
"name": "The Lowdown",
"relatedContentQuery": "posts/lowdown?",
"parent": "news",
"type": "terms",
"id": "lowdown",
"slug": "lowdown",
"link": "/lowdown",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"mindshift": {
"name": "Mindshift",
"parent": "news",
"description": "MindShift explores the future of education by highlighting the innovative – and sometimes counterintuitive – ways educators and parents are helping all children succeed.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "mindshift",
"slug": "mindshift",
"link": "/mindshift",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"news": {
"name": "News",
"grouping": [
"news",
"forum"
],
"type": "terms",
"id": "news",
"slug": "news",
"link": "/news",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"newsletters": {
"name": "newsletters",
"type": "terms",
"id": "newsletters",
"slug": "newsletters",
"link": "/newsletters",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"perspectives": {
"name": "Perspectives",
"parent": "radio",
"type": "terms",
"id": "perspectives",
"slug": "perspectives",
"link": "/perspectives",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"podcasts": {
"name": "Podcasts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "podcasts",
"slug": "podcasts",
"link": "/podcasts",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"pop": {
"name": "Pop",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "pop",
"slug": "pop",
"link": "/pop",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"pressroom": {
"name": "Pressroom",
"type": "terms",
"id": "pressroom",
"slug": "pressroom",
"link": "/pressroom",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"quest": {
"name": "Quest",
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "quest",
"slug": "quest",
"link": "/quest",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"radio": {
"name": "Radio",
"grouping": [
"forum",
"perspectives"
],
"description": "Listen to KQED Public Radio – home of Forum and The California Report – on 88.5 FM in San Francisco, 89.3 FM in Sacramento, 88.3 FM in Santa Rosa and 88.1 FM in Martinez.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "radio",
"slug": "radio",
"link": "/radio",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"root": {
"name": "KQED",
"image": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/2020/02/KQED-OG-Image@1x.png",
"imageWidth": 1200,
"imageHeight": 630,
"headData": {
"title": "KQED | News, Radio, Podcasts, TV | Public Media for Northern California",
"description": "KQED provides public radio, television, and independent reporting on issues that matter to the Bay Area. We’re the NPR and PBS member station for Northern California."
},
"type": "terms",
"id": "root",
"slug": "root",
"link": "/root",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"science": {
"name": "Science",
"grouping": [
"science",
"futureofyou"
],
"description": "KQED Science brings you award-winning science and environment coverage from the Bay Area and beyond.",
"type": "terms",
"id": "science",
"slug": "science",
"link": "/science",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"stateofhealth": {
"name": "State of Health",
"parent": "science",
"type": "terms",
"id": "stateofhealth",
"slug": "stateofhealth",
"link": "/stateofhealth",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"support": {
"name": "Support",
"type": "terms",
"id": "support",
"slug": "support",
"link": "/support",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"thedolist": {
"name": "The Do List",
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "thedolist",
"slug": "thedolist",
"link": "/thedolist",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"trulyca": {
"name": "Truly CA",
"grouping": [
"arts",
"pop",
"trulyca"
],
"parent": "arts",
"type": "terms",
"id": "trulyca",
"slug": "trulyca",
"link": "/trulyca",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"tv": {
"name": "TV",
"type": "terms",
"id": "tv",
"slug": "tv",
"link": "/tv",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"voterguide": {
"name": "Voter Guide",
"parent": "elections",
"alias": "elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "voterguide",
"slug": "voterguide",
"link": "/voterguide",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"guiaelectoral": {
"name": "Guia Electoral",
"parent": "elections",
"alias": "elections",
"type": "terms",
"id": "guiaelectoral",
"slug": "guiaelectoral",
"link": "/guiaelectoral",
"taxonomy": "site"
},
"news_category_politics": {
"isLoading": true
},
"news_13": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_13",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "13",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Politics",
"slug": "politics",
"taxonomy": "category",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Politics | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 13,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/politics"
},
"source_news_12103398": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12103398",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "CalMatters",
"link": "https://calmatters.org/",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12102140": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12102140",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "https://www.kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12103136": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12103136",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Political Breakdown",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12101418": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12101418",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"source_news_12101275": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "source_news_12101275",
"meta": {
"override": true
},
"name": "Prop Fest 2026",
"link": "http://kqed.org/propfest",
"isLoading": false
},
"news_31795": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_31795",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "31795",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 31812,
"slug": "california",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/california"
},
"news_8": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_8",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "8",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "News",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "News Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 8,
"slug": "news",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/news"
},
"news_34061": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34061",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34061",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "billionaires",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "billionaires Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 34078,
"slug": "billionaires",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/billionaires"
},
"news_18538": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_18538",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "18538",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 31,
"slug": "california",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/california"
},
"news_36336": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_36336",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "36336",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Election 2026",
"slug": "election-2026",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Election 2026 | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 36353,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/election-2026"
},
"news_17968": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17968",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17968",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Politics",
"slug": "politics",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Politics | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 18002,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/politics"
},
"news_36673": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_36673",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "36673",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "voter ID",
"slug": "voter-id",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "voter ID | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 36690,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/voter-id"
},
"news_33738": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33738",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33738",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33755,
"slug": "california",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/california"
},
"news_33734": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33734",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33734",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Local Politics",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Local Politics Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33751,
"slug": "local-politics",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/local-politics"
},
"news_33733": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33733",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33733",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "News",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "News Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33750,
"slug": "news",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/news"
},
"news_28250": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28250",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28250",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Local",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Local Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 28267,
"slug": "local",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/local"
},
"news_20149": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20149",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20149",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Congress",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Congress Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20166,
"slug": "congress",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/congress"
},
"news_27626": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_27626",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "27626",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "featured-news",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "featured-news Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 27643,
"slug": "featured-news",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/featured-news"
},
"news_34377": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34377",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34377",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "featured-politics",
"slug": "featured-politics",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "featured-politics Archives | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 34394,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/featured-politics"
},
"news_24206": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_24206",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "24206",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Katie Porter",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Katie Porter Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 24223,
"slug": "katie-porter",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/katie-porter"
},
"news_177": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_177",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "177",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Nancy Pelosi",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Nancy Pelosi Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 184,
"slug": "nancy-pelosi",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/nancy-pelosi"
},
"news_38": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_38",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "38",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "San Francisco",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "San Francisco Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 58,
"slug": "san-francisco",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/san-francisco"
},
"news_1217": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1217",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1217",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Scott Wiener",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Scott Wiener Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 1229,
"slug": "scott-wiener",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/scott-wiener"
},
"news_37408": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37408",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37408",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "The Speaker",
"slug": "the-speaker",
"taxonomy": "program",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "The Speaker | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37425,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/the-speaker"
},
"news_33520": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33520",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33520",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Podcast",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Podcast Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33537,
"slug": "podcast",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/podcast"
},
"news_37545": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37545",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37545",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "American politics",
"slug": "american-politics",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "American politics | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37562,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/american-politics"
},
"news_19442": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_19442",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "19442",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Bernie Sanders",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Bernie Sanders Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 19459,
"slug": "bernie-sanders",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/bernie-sanders"
},
"news_1323": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1323",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1323",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Donald Trump",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Donald Trump Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 1335,
"slug": "donald-trump",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/donald-trump"
},
"news_36046": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_36046",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "36046",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "election",
"slug": "election",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "election | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 36063,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/election"
},
"news_21116": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_21116",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "21116",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "impeachment",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "impeachment Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 21133,
"slug": "impeachment",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/impeachment"
},
"news_37551": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37551",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37551",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "insider trading",
"slug": "insider-trading",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "insider trading | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37568,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/insider-trading"
},
"news_37548": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37548",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37548",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Jan 6",
"slug": "jan-6-2",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Jan 6 | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37565,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/jan-6-2"
},
"news_37549": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37549",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37549",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "January 6th",
"slug": "january-6th",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "January 6th | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37566,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/january-6th"
},
"news_24474": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_24474",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "24474",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "midterm election",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "midterm election Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 24491,
"slug": "midterm-election",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/midterm-election"
},
"news_37547": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37547",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37547",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "STOCK act",
"slug": "stock-act",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "STOCK act | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37564,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/stock-act"
},
"news_37546": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37546",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37546",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "stock trading",
"slug": "stock-trading",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "stock trading | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37563,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/stock-trading"
},
"news_37550": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37550",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37550",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "The Squad",
"slug": "the-squad",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "The Squad | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37567,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/the-squad"
},
"news_33729": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33729",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33729",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "San Francisco",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "San Francisco Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33746,
"slug": "san-francisco",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/san-francisco"
},
"news_33523": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33523",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33523",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Bay Curious",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "program",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Bay Curious Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33540,
"slug": "bay-curious",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/bay-curious"
},
"news_34552": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34552",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34552",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "baycurious",
"slug": "baycurious",
"taxonomy": "program",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "baycurious | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 34569,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/baycurious"
},
"news_17986": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_17986",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "17986",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": "https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/BayCuriousLogoFinal01-e1493662037229.png",
"name": "Bay Curious",
"description": "\u003ch2>A podcast exploring the Bay Area one question at a time\u003c/h2>\r\n\r\n\u003caside>\r\n\u003cdiv style=\"width: 100%; padding-right: 20px;\">\r\n\r\nKQED’s \u003cstrong>Bay Curious\u003c/strong> gets to the bottom of the mysteries — both profound and peculiar — that give the Bay Area its unique identity. And we’ll do it with your help! You ask the questions. You decide what Bay Curious investigates. And you join us on the journey to find the answers.\r\n\u003cbr />\r\n\u003cspan class=\"alignleft\">\u003ca href=\"https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/id1172473406\">\u003cimg width=\"75px\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/DownloadOniTunes_100x100.png\">\u003c/a> \u003ca href=\"https://goo.gl/app/playmusic?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&isi=691797987&ius=googleplaymusic&link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ipi2mc5aqfen4nr2daayiziiyuy?t%3DBay_Curious\">\u003cimg width=\"75px\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/Google_Play_100x100.png\">\u003c/a>\u003c/span>\u003c/div>\r\n\u003c/aside> \r\n\u003ch2>What's your question?\u003c/h2>\r\n\u003cdiv id=\"huxq6\" class=\"curiosity-module\" data-pym-src=\"//modules.wearehearken.com/kqed/curiosity_modules/133\">\u003c/div>\r\n\u003cscript src=\"//assets.wearehearken.com/production/thirdparty/p.m.js\">\u003c/script>\r\n\u003ch2>Bay Curious monthly newsletter\u003c/h2>\r\nWe're launching it soon! \u003ca href=\"https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdEtzbyNbSQkRHCCAkKhoGiAl3Bd0zWxhk0ZseJ1KH_o_ZDjQ/viewform\" target=\"_blank\">Sign up\u003c/a> so you don't miss it when it drops.\r\n",
"taxonomy": "series",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "A podcast exploring the Bay Area one question at a time KQED’s Bay Curious gets to the bottom of the mysteries — both profound and peculiar — that give the Bay Area its unique identity. And we’ll do it with your help! You ask the questions. You decide what Bay Curious investigates. And you join us on the journey to find the answers. What's your question? Bay Curious monthly newsletter We're launching it soon! Sign up so you don't miss it when it drops.",
"title": "Bay Curious Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 18020,
"slug": "baycurious",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/series/baycurious"
},
"news_1758": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1758",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1758",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Economy",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "Full coverage of the economy",
"title": "Economy Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 2648,
"slug": "economy",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/economy"
},
"news_33812": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33812",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33812",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Interests",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Interests Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33829,
"slug": "interests",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/interests"
},
"news_28645": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28645",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28645",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "prop fest",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "prop fest Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 28662,
"slug": "prop-fest",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/prop-fest"
},
"news_423": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_423",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "423",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "taxes",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "taxes Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 432,
"slug": "taxes",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/taxes"
},
"news_22598": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_22598",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "22598",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "The Bay",
"description": "\u003cimg class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-11638190\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/02/TheBay_1200x6301.png\" alt=\"\" />\r\n\u003cbr/>\r\n\r\nEvery good story starts local. So that’s where we start. \u003ci>The Bay\u003c/i> is storytelling for daily news. KQED host Devin Katayama talks with reporters to help us make sense of what’s happening in the Bay Area. One story. One conversation. One idea.\r\n\r\n\u003cstrong>Subscribe to The Bay:\u003c/strong>\r\n\r\n\u003ca href=\"https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-bay/id1350043452?mt=2\">\u003cimg src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/01/Listen_on_Apple_Podcasts_sRGB_US-e1515635079510.png\" />\u003c/a>",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "Every good story starts local. So that’s where we start. The Bay is storytelling for daily news. KQED host Devin Katayama talks with reporters to help us make sense of what’s happening in the Bay Area. One story. One conversation. One idea. Subscribe to The Bay:",
"title": "The Bay Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 22615,
"slug": "the-bay",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/the-bay"
},
"news_33544": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33544",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33544",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Political Breakdown",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "program",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Political Breakdown Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33561,
"slug": "political-breakdown",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/political-breakdown"
},
"news_37190": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37190",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37190",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "featured politics",
"slug": "featured-politics-2",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "featured politics | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37207,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/featured-politics-2"
},
"news_37541": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37541",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37541",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "howard jarvis",
"slug": "howard-jarvis",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "howard jarvis | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37558,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/howard-jarvis"
},
"news_22235": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_22235",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "22235",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Political Breakdown",
"description": "\u003cimg class=\"alignnone size-medium wp-image-11638190\" src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/01/PB-for-FB-links.png\" alt=\"\" />\r\n\r\nJoin hosts\u003cstrong> Scott Shafer\u003c/strong> and \u003cstrong>Marisa Lagos\u003c/strong> as they unpack the week in politics with a California perspective. Featuring interviews with reporters and other insiders involved in the craft of politics—including elected officials, candidates, pollsters, campaign managers, fundraisers, and other political players—\u003ci>Political Breakdown \u003c/i>pulls back the curtain to offer an insider’s glimpse at how politics works today.\r\n\r\n\u003ca href=\"https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/political-breakdown/id1327641087?mt=2\">\u003cimg src=\"https://ww2.kqed.org/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/01/Listen_on_Apple_Podcasts_sRGB_US-e1515635079510.png\" />\u003c/a>",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "Join hosts Scott Shafer and Marisa Lagos as they unpack the week in politics with a California perspective. Featuring interviews with reporters and other insiders involved in the craft of politics—including elected officials, candidates, pollsters, campaign managers, fundraisers, and other political players—Political Breakdown pulls back the curtain to offer an insider’s glimpse at how politics works today.",
"title": "Political Breakdown Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 22252,
"slug": "political-breakdown",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/political-breakdown"
},
"news_37539": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37539",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37539",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Prop 43",
"slug": "prop-43",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Prop 43 | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37556,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/prop-43"
},
"news_37540": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37540",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37540",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "special taxes",
"slug": "special-taxes",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "special taxes | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37557,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/special-taxes"
},
"news_19906": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_19906",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "19906",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Environment",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Environment Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 19923,
"slug": "environment",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/environment"
},
"news_1386": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_1386",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "1386",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Bay Area",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Bay Area Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 1398,
"slug": "bay-area",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/bay-area"
},
"news_20179": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20179",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20179",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Buffy Wicks",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Buffy Wicks Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20196,
"slug": "buffy-wicks",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/buffy-wicks"
},
"news_6938": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_6938",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "6938",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "East Bay Regional Park District",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "East Bay Regional Park District Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 6962,
"slug": "east-bay-regional-park-district",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/east-bay-regional-park-district"
},
"news_28848": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28848",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28848",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Golden Gate Fields",
"slug": "golden-gate-fields",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Golden Gate Fields | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null,
"metaRobotsNoIndex": "noindex"
},
"ttid": 28865,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/golden-gate-fields"
},
"news_6243": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_6243",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "6243",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Jesse Arreguin",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Jesse Arreguin Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 6267,
"slug": "jesse-arreguin",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/jesse-arreguin"
},
"news_36379": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_36379",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "36379",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "outdoors",
"slug": "outdoors",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "outdoors | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 36396,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/outdoors"
},
"news_2905": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_2905",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "2905",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "parks",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "parks Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 2923,
"slug": "parks",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/parks"
},
"news_33741": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33741",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33741",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "East Bay",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "East Bay Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33758,
"slug": "east-bay",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/east-bay"
},
"news_34168": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34168",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34168",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Guides and Explainers",
"slug": "guides-and-explainers",
"taxonomy": "category",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Guides and Explainers Archives | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 34185,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/guides-and-explainers"
},
"news_35796": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_35796",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "35796",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "2026 midterms",
"slug": "2026-midterms",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "2026 midterms | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 35813,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/2026-midterms"
},
"news_32707": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_32707",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "32707",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "audience-news",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "audience-news Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 32724,
"slug": "audience-news",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/audience-news"
},
"news_4750": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_4750",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "4750",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "civil rights",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "civil rights Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 4769,
"slug": "civil-rights",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/civil-rights"
},
"news_28639": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28639",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28639",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Election Explainers",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Election Explainers Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 28656,
"slug": "election-explainers",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/election-explainers"
},
"news_35888": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_35888",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "35888",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "featured-audience-news",
"slug": "featured-audience-news",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "featured-audience-news | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 35905,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/featured-audience-news"
},
"news_28404": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28404",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28404",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "mail-in ballots",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "mail-in ballots Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 28421,
"slug": "mail-in-ballots",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/mail-in-ballots"
},
"news_28403": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28403",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28403",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "mail-in voting",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "mail-in voting Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 28420,
"slug": "mail-in-voting",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/mail-in-voting"
},
"news_831": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_831",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "831",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "usps",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "usps Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 841,
"slug": "usps",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/usps"
},
"news_36929": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_36929",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "36929",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Voting 2026",
"slug": "voting-2026",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Voting 2026 | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 36946,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/voting-2026"
},
"news_18540": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_18540",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "18540",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Education",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Education Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 2595,
"slug": "education",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/education"
},
"news_6266": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_6266",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "6266",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Housing",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Housing Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 6290,
"slug": "housing",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/housing"
},
"news_26598": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_26598",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "26598",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "affordability",
"slug": "affordability",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "affordability | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null,
"metaRobotsNoIndex": "noindex"
},
"ttid": 26615,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/affordability"
},
"news_20754": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20754",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20754",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "child care",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "child care Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20771,
"slug": "child-care",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/child-care"
},
"news_2043": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_2043",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "2043",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "children",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "children Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 2058,
"slug": "children",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/children"
},
"news_34055": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_34055",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "34055",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Daniel Lurie",
"slug": "daniel-lurie",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Daniel Lurie | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 34072,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/daniel-lurie"
},
"news_32102": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_32102",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "32102",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "early childhood education and care",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "early childhood education and care Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 32119,
"slug": "early-childhood-education-and-care",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/early-childhood-education-and-care"
},
"news_32928": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_32928",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "32928",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "early childhood services",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "early childhood services Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 32945,
"slug": "early-childhood-services",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/early-childhood-services"
},
"news_20013": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20013",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20013",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "education",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "education Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20030,
"slug": "education",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/education"
},
"news_27208": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_27208",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "27208",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "housing affordability",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "housing affordability Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 27225,
"slug": "housing-affordability",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/housing-affordability"
},
"news_28779": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_28779",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "28779",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "The Bay",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "program",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "The Bay is a daily news and culture program from KQED that covers the latest headlines, trends, and stories that matter to the Bay Area.",
"title": "The Bay Area Archives | KQED",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 28796,
"slug": "the-bay",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/program/the-bay"
},
"news_20156": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_20156",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "20156",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "California Democratic Party",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "California Democratic Party Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 20173,
"slug": "california-democratic-party",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/california-democratic-party"
},
"news_37174": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_37174",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "37174",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Manny Yekutiel",
"slug": "manny-yekutiel",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Manny Yekutiel | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 37191,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/manny-yekutiel"
},
"news_26778": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_26778",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "26778",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "nancy tung",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "nancy tung Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 26795,
"slug": "nancy-tung",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/nancy-tung"
},
"news_25113": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_25113",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "25113",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Rafael Mandelman",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Rafael Mandelman Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 25130,
"slug": "rafael-mandelman",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/rafael-mandelman"
},
"news_356": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_356",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "356",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Science",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "category",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Science Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 364,
"slug": "science",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/category/science"
},
"news_36059": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_36059",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "36059",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"name": "Gov. Gavin Newsom",
"slug": "gov-gavin-newsom",
"taxonomy": "tag",
"description": null,
"featImg": null,
"headData": {
"title": "Gov. Gavin Newsom | KQED News",
"description": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogDescription": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"twDescription": null,
"twImgId": null
},
"ttid": 36076,
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/gov-gavin-newsom"
},
"news_3187": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_3187",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "3187",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "science",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "science Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 3205,
"slug": "science-2",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/science-2"
},
"news_23282": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_23282",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "23282",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Sen. Scott Wiener",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "tag",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Sen. Scott Wiener Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 23299,
"slug": "sen-scott-wiener",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/tag/sen-scott-wiener"
},
"news_5078": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_5078",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "5078",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Berkeleyside",
"description": "Berkeleyside is Berkeley, California’s independently owned local news site. We report on the extraordinary diversity of people, issues, events, food and environment in our city on the Bay.",
"taxonomy": "affiliate",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": "Berkeleyside is Berkeley, California’s independently owned local news site. We report on the extraordinary diversity of people, issues, events, food and environment in our city on the Bay.",
"title": "Berkeleyside Archives | KQED Arts",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 5099,
"slug": "berkeleyside-2",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/affiliate/berkeleyside-2"
},
"news_33737": {
"type": "terms",
"id": "news_33737",
"meta": {
"index": "terms_1716263798",
"site": "news",
"id": "33737",
"found": true
},
"relationships": {},
"featImg": null,
"name": "Science",
"description": null,
"taxonomy": "interest",
"headData": {
"twImgId": null,
"twTitle": null,
"ogTitle": null,
"ogImgId": null,
"twDescription": null,
"description": null,
"title": "Science Archives | KQED News",
"ogDescription": null
},
"ttid": 33754,
"slug": "science",
"isLoading": false,
"link": "/news/interest/science"
}
},
"userPermissionsReducer": {
"wpLoggedIn": false
},
"eventsReducer": {},
"fssReducer": {},
"tvDailyScheduleReducer": {},
"tvWeeklyScheduleReducer": {},
"tvPrimetimeScheduleReducer": {},
"tvMonthlyScheduleReducer": {},
"userAccountReducer": {
"user": {
"email": null,
"emailStatus": "EMAIL_UNVALIDATED",
"loggedStatus": "LOGGED_OUT",
"loggingChecked": false,
"articles": [],
"firstName": null,
"lastName": null,
"phoneNumber": null,
"fetchingMembership": false,
"membershipError": false,
"memberships": [
{
"id": null,
"startDate": null,
"firstName": null,
"lastName": null,
"familyNumber": null,
"memberNumber": null,
"memberSince": null,
"expirationDate": null,
"pfsEligible": false,
"isSustaining": false,
"membershipLevel": "Prospect",
"membershipStatus": "Non Member",
"lastGiftDate": null,
"renewalDate": null,
"lastDonationAmount": null
}
]
},
"authModal": {
"isOpen": false,
"view": "LANDING_VIEW"
},
"error": null
},
"youthMediaReducer": {},
"checkPleaseReducer": {
"filterData": {
"region": {
"key": "Restaurant Region",
"filters": [
"Any Region"
]
},
"cuisine": {
"key": "Restaurant Cuisine",
"filters": [
"Any Cuisine"
]
}
},
"restaurantDataById": {},
"restaurantIdsSorted": [],
"error": null
},
"userAgentReducer": {
"userAgent": "CCBot/2.0 (https://commoncrawl.org/faq/)",
"isBot": true
},
"requestOutcomesReducer": {
"notFound": []
},
"navPromosReducer": {
"isFetching": false,
"fetchFailed": false,
"hasFetched": true,
"promos": {
"news": {},
"podcasts-radio": {},
"video-tv": {},
"events": {},
"support": {}
}
}
}