By Scott Kaufman, Legislative Director
Gov. Gavin Newsom calls a lot of special sessions. In November, he called one to “safeguard California values and fundamental rights in the face of an incoming Trump administration.” In August, he called one to “stop gas price spikes.” In 2022, he called one “to hold [the] oil industry accountable for price gouging.”
But what’s the point? Why do we need a special session for any of these things? Our state Legislature is a full-time legislature. They are in their “regular” session for most of the year. The session convenes in December and doesn’t end until September (with a month off for summer). It’s not like they need to be called back then. They’re already here.
So, what is calling a special session really about? Well, you could say it’s about emphasizing priorities. But it’s nothing more than political theater.
Here’s why.
Take the latest special session to “protect California values.” The governor called a special session in November. The legislature isn’t in session in November, so it would be reasonable to argue this was a proper use of the governor’s powers. An important event has happened, and the Legislature needs to come back early to deal with it.
The problem is, they didn’t come back in November. When Newsom called the special session, he gave it a starting date of “December 2, when the Legislature convenes.” Even then, they didn’t really get going on it until January — when the regular session is already fully underway. So why?
Well, the Legislature proposed sending $25 million to the California Department of Justice to “Trump-proof” California and another $25 million for illegal immigration legal and support services.
Then the wildfires erupted in Los Angeles County and the political posturing was seen for what it was: an empty exercise that was tone deaf and in poor taste, fiddling about Trump while Pacific Palisades and Altadena burned.
Media scrutiny was growing, and more responsible legislative members were justifiably questioning the wisdom of continuing the Trump-related special session, especially relative to more legitimate public concerns. But rather than go back to their regularly scheduled business and deal with all the issues facing California, including the wildfires, they doubled down.
Newsom announced he was expanding the special session to fight both Trump and the fires. Democrats also planned to lump it all together in one big bill. Tying funding for victims of a natural disaster to opposing Trump? That didn’t go well.
Many immediately objected to holding wildfire funding hostage and legislative leaders backed down after further public scrutiny. The Legislature then proposed $2.5 billion to respond to the fires and $50 million to fight Trump.
Then, at a legislative hearing, the governor’s Department of Finance couldn’t promise the funds wouldn’t go to protecting criminals from deportation. That derailed the bill for a few days until legislative leaders could draft a nonbinding letter that said the funds couldn’t be used for that. When Republicans tried including that language in the actual bill, Democrats voted against it and then passed the bill.
Sure, the governor and legislative leaders could have just tackled these conflicts with the Trump administration, and any other issue for that matter, in the normal course of their jobs. But that doesn’t generate national headlines. With Newsom’s national aspirations back on track after Kamala Harris’s defeat at the polls, garnering good press is a high priority for the administration.
But since he seems so fond of the press coverage he gets by calling special sessions, maybe he could call one about the multitude of issues plaguing our state. Here are some suggestions.
Let’s call a special session on California’s highest-in-the-nation homeless rate. According to the state auditor, California spent more than $24 billion on homelessness programs in the last five years and the problem has only gotten worse. The state’s most recent “point-in-time” count estimated more than 180,000 were homeless. That’s up 6 percent from the previous count.
Despite the state auditor noting that no one is tracking the impacts of this spending, the governor managed to talk the voters into throwing $6 billion more into the fire last year.
Maybe we need a special session on why California has the second-lowest literacy rate in the country. According to the EdVoice Institute, 60 percent of California students are not reading at grade level by third grade and approximately 28 percent of California adults are not literate.
Last year, Assembly Bill 2222 would have required phonics-based reading instruction that research shows is more effective, but it didn’t get a hearing because the teachers’ union opposed it.
How about a special session on California’s highest-in-the-nation home prices? The median home price in California was $906,600 according to the latest numbers from the California Association of REALTORS®. They calculated a minimum annual income of $236,800 was needed to qualify for the purchase of a median-priced, existing single-family home.
But that might be hard to do if you can’t find a job. It might be good to have a special session on why California has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country. The most recent data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows California had an unemployment rate of 5.4 percent in November of last year. Preliminary data shows it increased to 5.5 percent in December. That ties us with the District of Columbia and puts us just ahead of Nevada at the bottom of the list.
Or what about our soaring home insurance rates? Let’s have a special session about that. Many insurers have simply stopped writing policies in California, and the ones that remain are raising rates as fast as they can. State Farm has requested permission from the state’s insurance commissioner to raise rates 30 percent. Allstate is raising them 34 percent.
Now, a study from Insurify says they expect car insurance rates to increase 54 percent in California — that’s more than double the national average.
California has a lot of problems. Maybe we should talk about those instead of playing political games. My guess is the press coverage the governor would get from talking about those issues isn’t the kind he would want, though.