California Legislature’s bill bonanza lacks follow-up

With Friday’s deadline to introduce new bills this session, it’s been a flurry of activity at the state Capitol. A few interesting proposals:

• Plastic cups: Following last week’s unveiling of her bill to ban grocers and restaurants from offering plastic bags, Democratic Sen. Catherine Blakespear of Encinitas proposed another bill Wednesday to require restaurants to offer reusable cups to dine-in customers instead of single-use plastic or paper cups.

• Motorcycle helmets: Though riding a motorcycle without a helmet is illegal in California, Democratic Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria of Merced introduced a bill to exempt Sikh motorcyclists who wear turbans or patkas “as an expression of the person’s religious belief and practice.”

• Electric bicycles: Speaking of transportation, two Democratic Assemblymembers are proposing measures to restrict e-bike riding for youths, reports The San Francisco Standard. One bill seeks to prohibit kids age 11 and younger from riding an e-bike and to require e-bike riders without a driver’s license to take a safety course. The other would prohibit youths age 15 and younger from riding a class of e-bikes that can reach 20 mph.

• Domestic violence: Though Assemblymember Joe Patterson’s bill to expand the definition of a violent felony failed to advance through the Democratic-led Public Safety Committee last year, the Rocklin Republican is trying again with a narrower bill — to classify only felony domestic violence as a violent felony. In addition to increasing penalties, Patterson aims to reduce mass shootings, citing data that 68% of mass shooters have had a history of domestic violence.

• Fentanyl: Democratic Assemblymember Carlos Villapudua of Stockton announced a bill Wednesday to make it illegal to possess fentanyl while being armed with a “loaded and operable firearm.” The measure is narrower than one Soria unsuccessfully proposed last year.

But if any of these bills are signed into law, how much follow-up will there be on whether they’re working?

Not a ton, CalMatters’ data reporter Jeremia Kimelman and Capitol reporter Sameea Kamal found out.

One key way to track effectiveness is through reports from state agencies called for in many laws. But their analysis found that of the more than 1,100 reports that were supposed to be submitted in the past year to the Office of Legislative Counsel (the public repository for the reports), more than 70% never made it. 

That’s not all: Of the ones that were filed, half were submitted past their deadlines, which can prevent legislators from authoring or modifying bills in meaningful ways. That’s what happened to Assemblymember Tom Lackey, when his bill to renew a 2016 law did not initially include pertinent information from the California Highway Patrol. 

• Lackey, to CalMatters: “That’s a waste of resources, a waste of time and it’s frustrating.”

In addition to providing lawmakers with valuable research, these reports could also help them avoid drafting redundant bills, especially since about 2,000 new measures are introduced a year in California. But it’s unclear who should ensure these reports are submitted.

For more on the lack of oversight, read Jeremia and Sameea’s story.

This story is the latest in a recent series looking at how California’s Legislature works — or doesn’t. Previous ones looked at why so many bills get introduced, what lessons new legislators learned in their first year and how well lawmakers are representing their constituents.

To increase affordable housing, Assemblymember Alex Lee announced a proposal Wednesday to limit corporations and others that own more than 1,000 single-family homes from buying more and converting them to rentals. The Milpitas Democrat has some more sway to look out for struggling families as the new chairperson of the Human Services committee. I sat down with Lee to learn about what he hopes to accomplish, given the looming state budget deficit. The interview has been shortened for clarity and length.

As a Democratic Socialist, how do you see your progressive political philosophy translate into Human Services?

One of the government’s strongest suits is leveraging our individual strengths or contributions onto a massive scale. How does the will of the people, together, democratically choose to reapportion resources and make everyone better off? How do you make things more fair for everyone? Rather than say, “Hey, you’re struggling? You’re off on your own.” That’s not our philosophy in the state of California, and I want to make sure that during the budget crisis, this is an area that, among Democrats, is going to be a big priority to protect.

Are there safety net programs and services that you prioritize to protect?

To give it some context, 31.1% of Californians live in poverty in 2023, which is a historic high. The Human Services part of our state budget is only 12.5%. If you think about how we invest in the poorest Californians, we don’t proportionately do that much directly.

When it comes to foster care, homelessness or just your basic human services for people who live in poverty — that stuff financially reaps dividends in the future. Because the amount of prevention we’re doing now, in the end, will cost us less than having to eventually mitigate or rehouse people who fall completely through the cracks.

That’s also why I’m calling for revenue options like the wealth tax, taxing billionaires, all these things. In addition to rainy day reserves, accounting tricks we do and cutting things, we should also be looking at the revenue options. (Lee’s wealth tax proposal is DOA, according to Gov. Gavin Newsom.) 

Food banks have warned of a looming “hunger crisis.” What are your priorities here?

During the pandemic, when we said everyone’s health and safety and well-being was the number one priority, the food banks were able to basically say, “No questions asked, you need food, come get it.”

I’m more of that model. I believe in universal service. We should look at reforms of how to make things more efficient. When you assume everyone’s a fraud and not that everyone needs help, then you create a different system.

Meet more lawmakers: Read my prior interviews with first-termers Sen. Caroline Menjivar, a San Fernando Valley Democrat; and Assemblymembers Corey Jackson, a Moreno Valley Democrat; Patterson; Stephanie Nguyen, an Elk Grove Democrat; Liz Ortega, a Hayward Democrat; and Pilar Schiavo, a Santa Clarita Valley Democrat.

Rep. Ro Khanna, who is becoming a bigger player on the national political stage, has some thoughts on the 2024 election.

After considering a run himself, he endorsed Rep. Barbara Lee in the hard-fought U.S. Senate primary over fellow Democratic Reps. Katie Porter and Adam Schiff. He’s a co-chairperson of her campaign and calls her a “hero and an incredible voice” on progressive priorities. 

In a Zoom conversation Wednesday with CalMatters reporters and editors, the Fremont Democrat said the reason Lee isn’t doing better is because she’s being vastly outspent. If the campaign money were even, he said he has “no doubt” she would make the top two in the March 5 primary and advance to November.

• Khanna: “She’s an underdog. She knows that.” 

But he said Lee still has a shot as she gathers more support, including from celebrities like John Legend. If Lee doesn’t advance, but Porter and Schiff do, Khanna said he’ll make an endorsement decision after that.

On the election more broadly, Khanna sees it playing out on two different paths: The presidential race will be decided, as usual, by Pennsylvania and other swing states. But control of Congress will go through California and New York, where Republicans flipped seats to win back the House in 2022.

A Democrat prevailed in Tuesday’s special election to replace the disgraced George Santos in New York, meaning that the Republican majority will shrink to six. And Khanna said he believes Democrats can flip two or three U.S. House seats in California this year.

On the presidential race, Khanna campaigned for Joe Biden in New Hampshire, even though he has been critical of the president for not calling for a permanent ceasefire in the Gaza war. But Khanna said it’s a “no-brainer” to enthusiastically back Biden over former President Donald Trump.

Khanna said Biden is a “bridge to a more progressive future.” Asked whether that bridge is getting too old and creaky, Khanna said that in recent conversations, Biden was “very knowledgeable” and “fully mentally sharp.”

But Khanna acknowledged that public perception on the age issue matters as much as the reality. 

• Khanna: “It’s going to be a hard-fought campaign.”