A View from DC: How California Leaders are Navigating the Trump Administration
57:52 Share

Support for Forum comes from Rancho La Puerta, a wellness resort in Baja, California, just an hour from San Diego. Recently voted the number one destination spa by readers of Travel and Leisure magazine. Summer retreat packages of three, four, or seven nights including hiking, water classes, mindfulness, spa therapies, and culinary adventures with farm-fresh ingredients. Learn more at rancholapuerta.com.

Greetings, Boomtown. The Xfinity Wi-Fi is booming! Xfinity combines the power of internet and mobile. So we've all got lightning fast speeds at home and on the go! Learn more at Xfinity.com. Restrictions apply. Xfinity internet required. Actual speeds vary. From KQED.

From KQED in San Francisco, I'm Alexis Madrigal. Democrats are mad. I don't mean the Washington leaders, but the rank and file, the indivisible group leaders, the Facebook posters, the librarians, the service union workers, the scientists, the moderates, the liberals, the leftists. Just about everybody agrees who identifies blue. They are mad about Trump and almost as mad that Democrats haven't done more to stop his administration.

We check in with KQED's Marisa Lagos and Scott Schaefer, who are in D.C. right now talking with California political leaders. And we ask a bigger question, too. Who will be in the next generation of political leaders? That's all coming up next, right after this news. Alexis Madrigal here. We've got a little pledge break going. So you get a little bonus on the Pledge Free Stream podcast or on our replay at night. I write these meditations on the Bay. We call the series One Good Thing.

Around this time of year, the California poppies start blooming. They don't care about location. They make themselves at home just about everywhere, and they don't need help from anyone to come into glorious flower. On the medians of San Pablo, on the hillsides, in scrubby gardens and random cracks on the sidewalk, they are just going right now. And what could be more beautiful than to be waiting at a light and look out the window of your car at a whole spray of perfect flowers swaying gently?

There are many things to love about poppies. I love that they open in the morning sun and then delicately close up at night like a swaddled baby. I love seeing every flying bug in the bay take a turn landing on their stamen or taking a rest on their petals. They're a whole season, a whole mood, a whole vibe all on their own. And I love that they're rugged and delicate at the same time.

But my real appreciation for these plants is the specific color of the orange of the poppy. Friends call it different things. Caitlin says Garibaldi, Kelly California Orange, Rebecca Pyroll Orange, Kelly Gold Vermilion. These are good names.

But the orange of the California poppy flower cannot really be captured in a photo or by the definitions we use of RGB or CMYK to define the colors you see on a screen. There's something different, something like a butterfly wing, something velveteen, a trick of light and material that can't actually be captured but only experienced in a human body with human eyes looking at a real, actual plant.

Of course, the orange of the poppy is not the only thing that spills beyond what we can spear it into a phone. Just about everything embodied is not quite the same as the photos or videos we can capture. But there's something for me about having a color.

Something that seems like a camera should know how to grab from the real world, fully escape not just description, but any kind of human categorization. The only way to really describe the color of California poppies is to say the color of California poppy. So enjoy this season. Stop and look. Watch for the pollinators. Track their opening and closing through the day. Live in this world.

California poppy orange, that's your one good thing.

Welcome to Forum. I'm Alexis Madrigal. We've got the political breakdown team with us live from Washington, D.C. KQED's Marisa Lagos and Scott Schaefer are wandering the halls of Congress talking with the California delegation. There's a lot to talk about. The tariffs, immigration, cuts, the science, the future of the party. So let's get right to it. Marisa and Scott, welcome. Hey, how you doing, Alexis? Good. I hope you all are surviving out there. Scott, maybe we'll start with you on this. You know, Trump has always

always had beef with the state of California, really made no effort to hide his disdain. Why is California such a symbolic slash real threat to Trump's power? Well, I don't know if it's a real threat, but, you know, certainly we can start with Kamala Harris or Gavin Newsom, for that matter. Both have been leading critics of Donald Trump going all the way back to 2015.

And of course, California, although it provides more donations to Donald Trump than any other state, has always voted overwhelmingly Democratic. And I think he views a lot of these things as just transactional politics. You know, are these people for me or against me? If they're against me, I'm against them.

So I think it's like that. And we're seeing in small ways and large, he has gone after California on everything from threatening federal funding to help with the wildfires to putting tariffs on films coming into this country from overseas when Gavin Newsom is trying to propose more of a tax credit to help Hollywood. We're seeing him try to claw back money for the Presidio Trust.

You know, he throws out an idea of turning Alcatraz back into a prison. Some of it is like a cat playing with a mouse and some of it is real. And certainly it's having a real impact on California. And some of the biggest things are yet to come, Alexis. The biggest thing being, of course, the federal budget, which is now under discussion. And California is really on, you know, on pins and needles waiting to see especially what kind of cuts are going to come down to Medicaid funds.

You know, California has a huge number of people who are, you know, benefit from that program. And so it's called Medi-Cal, of course. So we'll see what happens there. And there's a lot of division within the Republican Party as well on that question. Yeah.

And we'll get to some of those bigger budgetary questions, particularly around Medicaid and what our leaders are saying out there. Marisa, what's different this time for California? I mean, you know, state leaders had the first Trump administration to kind of tangle with Donald Trump. So how do you think they're responding differently? How do you think it's going this time?

I don't know if they're responding differently. I mean, what's different in part is just like who's here in Washington and the status of Californians. Right. I mean, Dianne Feinstein has passed away since the first Trump term. Nancy Pelosi has stepped down as leader of House Democrats. You do have despite the sort of lack of generational change happening nationally or at least not completely in the Senate. At least, you know, we do have two relatively young senators, at least for that body of

But that also comes with less seniority and power. So I do think that's one big difference.

And, you know, I think that there's been a real difference in the way that both the public and Democrats and those who oppose Trump have responded because there's been a difference in both the way Trump won. I mean, it was despite the close margins, a national victory. He won the popular vote. He won the swing states. And he also just came in with a plan and a plan to execute that plan and a team around him who was willing to do that. And so I think that, you

You know, there's a little bit of still shock from the fact that Trump won it all that we've seen in the Democratic Party. And then some sort of overwhelm in terms of how much they have unleashed in these first months. You know, it's interesting.

Being in the Bay Area where we are surrounded by mostly Democrats, Alexis, I feel like there's a lot of consternation, a lot of people who are very like sort of on a daily level worried and upset and concerned. And you can see it and feel it and hear it in the calls we get on your show and the conversations we have. Oh, just wait, Marisa. Yeah. Yeah.

I'm not saying that Democrats here are like, oh, everything's great. But I think when you're kind of in the middle of it and your job is to put one foot in front of the other and do the job, there's a little bit less of a sort of desire to want to at least publicly telegraph that freak out. And I also think that, you know, one thing. You think that's good or bad, though?

in one way, I think it's good because like you got to keep your head on if you're going to mount an opposition. Right. And it is, you know, a long road, 540 something days between now and the midterm elections. But, you know, Alex Padilla pointed out something to us that I found was interesting. I think a lot of people, especially on the far left in the Bay Area, are like, will we even have an election again? Like what's going to happen next? And you talk to someone like Padilla, we asked him, like, why is someone like Ted Cruz co-sponsoring a bill with you to create a Latino museum?

Seems like the exact opposite of the DEI, anti-DEI kind of move by the Republican Party. And he was like, well, I think Cruz knows he'll be here after Trump is gone. So I think they're just a little bit more sanguine and maybe level-headed. Yeah.

Yeah, I would. And I would add, you know, we just talked with Pete Aguilar, who's the number three Democrat in the House from Redlands, the San Bernardino area. And, you know, we were asking this question, like, where are the Democrats? What is their message? And he did point out that in 2006, when George W. Bush was president, the Democrats retook the House.

Nancy Pelosi came out with what she called 6-in-06, like the six points in their platform, which a lot of people like us in the media rolled their eyes at. That was announced 60 or 70 days before the election in 2006, and it was very successful for them. So I think they take a slightly longer view of things, and to Marisa's point, they're maybe not perfect.

panicking. But you can be sure they're very, very focused. But can I, because I know people are probably out there like pulling their hair out. Like one thing that did frustrate me. No, that was actually just me. No hair to pull out, but I was doing it. One thing that is sort of frustrating to me, and I just turned in our political breakdown newsletter. So shout out, subscribe to that if you want a more detailed look at this. But

There is zero interest in like actually engaging at least publicly on the debates that we are seeing, you know, kind of play out in the media around like what is the Democrats problem? Is it messaging? Is it policy? Is it, you know, centrist versus progressive? Is it a populist message like that?

Every single, I think, Democrat we've talked to this week, when we've asked that question, has kind of just pivoted and wanting to talk about the, as they see it, the bad things that Republicans are doing, wanting to talk about their agenda, which is all fine and good, but like they have no power right now. So it doesn't really matter if you're for the child tax credit if you can't get that over the finish line. And I'll

note that a lot of the stuff that they're talking about was at least started or done or put in place and then peeled back under Biden. And they didn't get electoral credit for it. So I think that they do need some help with this, you know, some some deep thoughts about how they're going to really do this.

You know, as a brand, they're not looking great. They're actually pulling lower than Trump. But I think that's not actually apples to apples when you say like the Democratic Party versus one person. And it's always true that Congress is pulled terribly and your congressperson has done all right and all that. I just want to say the 6-0-6 and just people are pulling into this bag incredibly.

On this show, at least, you know, we end up doing all these things about many outside observers outside the United States, other countries, many academics are saying, no, the United States is sliding into authoritarianism. And then you've got our folks in California in the delegation out there, both Republicans and Democrats, basically acting 100 percent business as usual. I would disagree. No. OK, go ahead. Well.

Sorry. They're sliding into authoritarianism or that? No, no, no, no. I think it's not either or. It's yes. And I mean, if you look at like Attorney General Rob Bonta and Governor Newsom, they've already filed over a dozen lawsuits and they've had some success. So I think, you know, on things like tariffs, having the authority to implement tariffs unilaterally. So I do think a lot of that is happening at the same time, though. Yeah. You have people who are civil libertarians, attorneys or advocates.

They are rightly concerned about this slide toward authoritarianism and attacks on the media and the courts, universities and academic freedom. I mean, those are all real things, but it's not an either or. I think, you know, and it's not that Congress has to do it all. The Democrats in Congress don't have to do all those things. But but, you know, the frustration is real and it's understandable. Yeah.

We're talking with the co-host of the KQED podcast, Political Breakdown, Scott Schaefer, Senior Editor on the KQED Politics and Government Desk. Marisa Lagos, Correspondent also on the KQED Politics and Government Desk.

What are your questions about how California politicians are responding to Trump? Of course, both the Democratic and Republican delegations out there. What are your reactions to what you're hearing? You can give us a call. The number is 866-733-6786. That's 866-733-6786. We might talk Gavin Newsom after the break, for example.

You can also email your comments and questions to forum at kqed.org. You can find us on social media, Blue Sky, Instagram, etc. We're KQED Forum, or you can join the Discord community. I'm Alexis Madrigal. Stay tuned for more right after the break. Support for KQED Podcasts comes from San Francisco International Airport. Did

Did you know that SFO has a world-class museum? Get ready to be wowed by art, history, science, and cultural exhibitions throughout the terminals. Learn more at flysfo.com slash museum. Support for Forum comes from Rancho La Puerta, a wellness resort on 4,000 acres in the mountains of Baja, California, just 45 minutes from San Diego.

Family-owned and operated since 1940, Rancho La Puerta offers adult summer camp-like vacations for anyone who enjoys hiking, mindfulness, and fitness classes. Special rates and offers are available for summer stays and first-time guests. Learn more at rancholapuerta.com.

Welcome back to Forum. Alexis Madrigal here. We've got Scott Schaefer, Senior Editor on the KQED Politics and Government Desk, and Marisa Lagos, Correspondent there. Of course, they host KQED Podcast Political Breakdown. Let's bring in a caller here, Bob Ian Moran. Welcome. Hi there. I just wanted to make a comment that characterizing people who are seriously worried about whether there's going to be fair elections in two years as on the far left is

is frankly irresponsible. I think a lot of people are actually tempered and been watching what's been happening over actually over a long period of time understand that virtually anything at this point is happening

And when you have a level of sociopathy that we're seeing in the presidency, we have to be able to understand that they're capable of virtually anything. And characterizing that as a far left worry is, I think, unrealistic. I don't think that's what I meant. Yeah, no, go ahead.

it's just important to note that like you know if you look at UC Berkeley put out a poll this week and at the end of the day even with some of the slipping of Trump's support nationally you know those 100 day polls we saw the the overreaction

The overall mood of, you know, the California electorate is still incredibly partisan. Right. If you are a Republican, odds are you support what's happening with Trump. If you are a Democrat, odds are you're against it. And if you're an independent, it probably breaks on the lines of the way you do to vote. Like, are you more likely to go Democratic or Republican? And so I just it was interesting. I mean, we had a similar situation.

Assemblyman, former job representative Kevin Kylian just this morning. We interviewed him for our show. And, you know, it's like even though there are areas where he was willing to sort of critique Trump and say maybe he went too far on things and that Congress should have some oversight or pushback.

He is reflecting the voters that put him in office because that's where they're at. Yeah. Do you I mean, sticking with Democrats, though, it does feel to me like they're kind of, you know, we normally think of people on this kind of left right spectrum. Like that's the axis that we're kind of looking at politics. And and then like within, you know, the left side of that spectrum, there's, you know, most of the Democrats are sort of there. Yeah.

But it feels like there's another axis that's opening up, which is basically regardless of your politics on the policy issues, there's this sort of do you want Democrats to go with a more Mitch McConnell obstructionist approach to the Trump administration? Do you want them to fight along that axis or are you like, well, it's important that we just kind of keep the government functioning properly?

even if we're making compromises on, on, uh, other kinds of positions. What do you think, Scott? Do you, do you buy that there's a, a new, or at least that other access has taken on greater importance? I think there is some of that. I mean, there are some, you know, Democrats who say, well, let's just give him enough rope and he'll hang himself. All the, all the Republicans, then we can run against all these things that they did in 2006 and win back the house. And, you know, that, so that's one train of thought. But what's also interesting is that, you know, we're seeing, uh,

Bernie Sanders and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez with doing these rallies all over the country where it's basically the fighting oligarchy tour. And they're attracting tens of thousands of people. And what's interesting is that they're not only going to some purple districts or red districts, but they're also appearing with members of Congress who are in purple districts, which is something I don't think you would have seen a couple of years ago. And I think that more Democrats are coming around

to the understanding that Democrats have lost working class voters and they need to embrace policies that are going to, you know, appeal to the voters that they've lost, to union households and others. So I do think, you know, there is...

sentiment that Democrats want to see their representatives stand up and actually do something specific, not just say we don't have any power or just have town hall meetings. You know, it's true that their levers of power are not controlled by Democrats, but there are

things they could be doing in terms of oversight. You don't necessarily need a congressional panel to do oversight. You can do it in the community. You can create a project 2029 and say, this is what we're going to do and contrast it with what's happening right now. So I just think that there's an appetite for more assertiveness on the part of Democrats that many feel is lacking right now.

Here is another question. There are people who are taking some actions in California Democratic politics. One of them is Gavin Newsom, Marisa Lagos. Is he? Well, his podcasting is an action, right? It is our job. So what do you make of what Gavin Newsom is doing? I mean, he's had Steve Bannon on his show before.

He has reached out, at least in some public sense, to Donald Trump saying, let's get it done around some kind of deal around the film industry. Like what's going on there? To give Newsom some credit, I think he is trying to walk a very fine line. And he's not the only Democratic governor. You see this with the blowback, you know, Gretchen Whitmer's gotten in Michigan and others, you know, everywhere.

He came into office when L.A. was on fire and he was very acutely aware of the kind of delicate balance there of not crossing the president's because of the aid and support that the state needs for that type of disaster. You know, I think that when it comes down to it, like I would put that and the way that he's trying to sort of interface with Trump in a different bucket than the podcast, which I find sort of ridiculous. I think.

You know, and that's why you see like in this UC Berkeley poll that came out this week, like

two to one margin of voters saying they think that Newsom's actually devoting more of his attention to things to help him as a possible candidate for president than to governing the state. I think that is a warning flag for the governor in a state this deeply Democratic. I mean, again, clearly Republicans are more likely to dislike him than Democrats, but I think there's distrust there. So look on the merits. California, as Scott said, has sued. I think now we're up to 16, 18 lawsuits.

the attorney general in particular, Rob Bonta is pushing back very hard against what they see as illegal moves. I think the state, you know, Newsom was there at the tariff press conference. There are areas where he is willing to kind of not pull his punches with Trump. But I do think I do have some empathy about, you know, in this moment with somebody who is very vindictive, not wanting to be in this place. But I think that, you know,

If he wants to have a political future, I do think we're going to have to see a little bit more of a backbone as things approach 2026. Scott, do you want to take that one? Yeah, no, I agree. You know, but it is difficult, especially earlier in the year when L.A. is on fire, you know, and you're there with the president. You've got to get, you know, federal money that he's threatening to withhold, whether he really meant that or not. I don't know.

But, you know, it's funny. Some of this, I think, is what Jerry Brown said back in 1982 when he was governor after eight years and then he tried to run for the Senate and lost to Pete Wilson. And he said, you know, after a while, the voters, they get tired of you. And you know what? We get tired of them, too.

And I think Newsom's getting toward the end of his eight years. And so there's some of that fatigue with him is just sort of natural. But I also think there's no question that he wants to be president. And so everything he does is going to be viewed through that lens.

And, you know, it's going to be difficult to see, you know, how he gets both things done, both, you know, getting the money and all those things for California, this tax credit he wants to save Hollywood film industry, you know, and also, you know, sue him over tariffs and everything else. It is a tough, you know, two-step to dance. Yeah. Yeah.

We've got Scott Schaefer and Marisa Lagos, you know them from our KQED Politics and Government desk here at the station, of course. You can give us a call. We'd love to hear from you. What do you want from our California delegation out in Washington? 866-733-6786. That's 866-733-6786. Forum at kqed.org. All the social media things, Blue Sky, Instagram, et cetera. We're KQED Forum. Let's bring in Paul in San Francisco. Welcome.

Yes. Asking the California Democratic Party leadership why...

What they should do to make sure Mr. Trump's policies don't get enacted is they should look in the mirror. They're the ones who put Trump in the office. Their policies put Trump in the office. They should look at why blue-collar, working-class Californians and people across the country voted for Trump. Most people don't buy into the woke policies and the extremist woke policies, and they doubled down on it.

And everybody that voted for Trump is not a racist, is not xenophobic, and is not a hater. Maybe the Democratic Party leadership in California should find out why people voted for Trump and why blue-collar people voted for Trump. Thanks for that, Paul in San Francisco. Appreciate that. Marisa, what do you think? I mean, you know, it's a hard one, I think, because...

there's sort of data points on both sides. If you're going to talk about like the success or failures of California, we all know the challenges the state faces around homelessness, housing, cost of living, all of these things. Um, on the other hand, you know, the state has expanded dramatically its healthcare safety net, um, and a lot of other safety nets, including in ways that our caller or other folks who supported Trump may disagree with, like

you know, giving undocumented children to start and then adults later access to medical insurance. You know, Alex Padilla, the senator, was quick to point out yesterday when we spoke with him that California just overtook Japan as the world's fourth largest economy. And his argument is that that's not because of, you know, in spite of things like our quote unquote DEI policies or, you know, welcoming immigrants, our progressive sort of state policies, that it's because of that.

I think you can, you know, debate all these points. But at the end of the day, you know, Democrats certainly do not want to have another fight about like transgender issues specifically. They want to be making the case on the economy, on people's pocketbook issues that, you know, that the Democrats

President has overstepped on immigration, those sorts of things. And not all of those are sort of left right issues. I mean, I think in general, we've just seen a real re-scrabbling of the entire political universe. And it feels a lot more like 3D than left right anymore. And I think also, you know, Paul makes a good point that Democrats sometimes can't get out of their own way. We saw that, you know, just this week in Sacramento on a bill on solicitation of minors.

I won't go into all the details, but there was a similar dust-up where Democrats were kind of on the wrong side of a sex trafficking bill, and Newsom had to intervene and support the Republican bill sponsored by someone from the Inland Empire. So I think that Democrats also just are not great on messaging.

And so I think that there's a way to talk about immigration and border security and transgender rights in a way that allows you to also pivot away from that. You don't want to spend all your time talking about that because those are not winning. Those are 80-20 issues for Republicans or something like that, 70-30. So I think that it's part of the Democrats' own making, as Paul said, I think that it

that is true. And whether they're saying it or not publicly, you can be sure they're thinking about it and talking about it privately. Let's bring in...

Farhan in San Jose. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you very much. Well, just calling to kind of address the fact that we do need to meet halfway. And I feel the news is trying to do that, to meet halfway between conservatives and liberals. And it's needed right now in this environment to kind of just meet halfway and say, you know what? Let's not go all left or let's not go all right. But we need middle ground.

You know, Farhan, I totally hear what you're saying, but let's say one party radicalizes and moves way far on the spectrum. Then meeting them halfway would just pull the other party over, right? It could, but I feel that it's better to kind of try to meet them halfway. Try to meet that people. For instance, right now the people that voted for the current president, I'm pretty sure that they now see how...

as bad it could turn out. But if we kind of like try to agree on certain things, not everything, of course not. But I know that people on the left side, they also do not agree everything that the left side is saying. But

They have no choice. So if we meet halfway, I'm pretty sure we can pull both sides a little bit together and avoid this division that we now have. And it's dangerous for the whole country. Really appreciate that, Baran. Let's go right to Susan in San Francisco with a different kind of point. Welcome, Susan.

Hi, good morning. Thanks for this forum. I'm somewhat echoing a previous caller as a history teacher. I'm very, very concerned. I'm really pretty freaked out, as most of my colleagues are, that we're much closer

to an oligarch much closer. If we take a look at how the Nazis took control in Germany, what the trajectory was step by step, and we look at a president who's really not sure if his job is to uphold the Constitution, I think we're looking at a really serious situation. A lot of Americans, I understand, are focused on financial issues, but there's a lot more serious problems

consequences to the road we're going down. And the problem is it's just bit by bit by bit before you realize that you're boiling in the crab pot. Susan, really... And Marisa, I wanted those calls back to back, I feel like, are indicative of the issue. Yeah.

These are conversations that we have been having certainly on our show, Political Breakdown, since before the election, looking at what we can learn from places like Hungary and other places that have had democratic elections lead to more sort of authoritarian changes within those previously democratic systems. And I think that's absolutely right and very important. I think sort of what was misunderstood earlier by some of the callers, what I'm talking about here is that

If you believe that, then it is your responsibility to be out there fighting against this administration, not just Nancy Pelosi's and the folks in Congress. They are representatives of, you know, the people who put them there. And I do think that one thing, you know, we've heard in recent weeks, having some of these conversations with experts in, you know, oligarchies and, you know, and backsides into more dictatorial sort of processes is,

is how important it is that this is not just the opposition party itself and the elected officials pushing back, that it is the public, that it is, you know, us doing our job in the media to have these conversations and to point out when things are not being done in a democratic way. I guess...

My point is just not that like everyone here, you know, talking to Senator Alex Padilla thinks, oh, it's going to be fine. Just wait it out of four years. But that their job is to not just sort of raise the alarm bells, but also continue doing their job in Congress. And that the public's job is to stand up and say what they believe, too, because that is still the system we have. Scott?

Yeah, no, I totally agree. And you're seeing that, as we mentioned earlier, the rallies that Bernie Sanders and AOC are doing. You know, I've been struck, you know, there was that day of protest a couple few weeks ago, and I happened to be in Palm Springs, which is, you know, not the center of the political universe, kind of a sleepy town in a lot of ways.

But I went down to City Hall, it was a Saturday morning, just to see, like, who turned out. There were thousands and thousands of people. Now, this is partly perhaps a reflection of the demographics in Palm Springs, but they were definitely on the older side. And I think it's not just in Palm Springs. I mean, I'm wondering, like, where are the Gen Z folks? I mean, the younger people, if you look at, like, the Vietnam War protests, it was students, university students, and others who were, you know, maybe susceptible to the draft or actually were veterans there.

But I do wonder, you know, since a lot of these issues that people are concerned about are going to really land most harshly on younger generations, whether it's climate change, the budget, Medicaid cuts, you know. So I think that to Marisa's point, yes, there is a role for the public to play. And, you know, I think it's beginning to be seen, but there's a lot of room for growth on that. But.

Bunch of folks writing in with comments like this. Chris writes, frustrated Dem here. I send comments to Schiff, but he doesn't respond to my observations. I'd like to see some concerted pushback from the Democrats. How about a marathon holding the floor like Booker did with a parade of senators voicing their pushback? Another listener, I've been a Democrat for 50 years, but I am seriously considering changing to no party affiliation.

The party has more blind spots than a semi-truck with no mirrors. Leadership does not lead the base. It follows. That's the debacle of 2024. People who don't like Trump voted for him because he offered policy. Democrats could learn a lot from Trump's campaign. And...

Naomi writes, why are Democrats not taking a page out of the Republican playbook and working on their own Project 2029 agenda? Why not take this time to develop a clearly articulated plan on addressing the concerns that people had that got Trump elected for a second term? I'd like to see them start to work out a plan for next steps versus just voicing their displeasure at Trump's policies. I want to return to this when we get back. We are, of course,

Talking with the co-hosts of KQED's Political Breakdown, Scott Schaefer, senior editor on the Politics and Government Desk, and Marisa Lagos, correspondent. We're taking your calls, 866-733-6786. If you can't get through there, really like in the comments as well. Forum at KQED.org. I'm Alexis Madrigal. Stay tuned.

Support for Forum comes from San Francisco Opera. Experience the soaring highs and heartbreaking lows of bohemian life this summer in John Caird's beloved production of La Boheme. Puccini's most adored opera transports us into the heady bohemian world of 19th century Paris as we follow a circle of starving artists falling in and out of love, living for the moment. La Boheme runs June 3rd to 21st.

Learn more at sfopera.com. Greetings, Boomtown. The Xfinity Wi-Fi is booming! Xfinity combines the power of internet and mobile. So we've all got lightning-fast speeds at home and on the go. That's where our producers got the idea to mash our radio shows together.

Through June 23rd, new customers can get 400 megabit Xfinity Internet and get one unlimited mobile line included, all for $40 a month for one year. Visit Xfinity.com to learn more. With paperless billing and auto-pay with store bank account, restrictions apply. Xfinity Internet required. Texas fees extra. After one year, rate increases to $110 a month. After two years, regular rates apply. Actual speeds vary.

Welcome back to Forum. Alexis Madrigal here. Scott Schaefer and Marisa Lagos from our politics and government team. Let's talk about some of these specifics. Steve on the Discord writes, I'd like to hear an update on California's specific automobile emissions regulations.

regulations, which are broadly only done by permission of the federal regulatory apparatus. Personally, if the Fed strips this from California, I'll be writing to all the big automakers, letting them know they'll be on my do not buy, do not recommend list unless they voluntarily adhere. Have we heard anything on those regs? Yeah. Well, in fact, you know, there is this waiver that has been supported bipartisanly over the decades. George W. Bush renewed it.

And so the Republicans now in Congress are trying to remove that waiver to let it expire. And the Senate parliamentarian has told them that they cannot do it through this budget reconciliation process. They have to do it through the normal process, which, of course, would have to get over the filibuster and 60 votes.

And there's a chance they may, you know, ignore that advice or fire the parliamentarian. And in which case that that waiver could end, there will be a price to pay for that. I think politically and otherwise, certainly our air quality would suffer. But, you know, that that's the kind of thing that Republicans are targeting. I mean, we've seen this.

you know, all kinds of green energy initiatives that were started under Biden or Newsom here in California that have been, you know, been under attack by the Republicans. And that clean air waiver is certainly among them. I mean, Alexis, you know, that's obviously more important than just that waiver, too, because of what it would mean. I mean, right now, essentially, the filibuster means that on most bills that aren't like budget related and appointments, the Democrats do have some leverage to stop the agenda of this administration. Right.

But I think it's also, you know, the caller sort of talked about public pressure on the automakers directly. And let's not forget, in 2019, as Trump was threatening similar action, Newsom did go out and make deals, strike deals with, I think, four or five huge automakers to essentially keep the standards where they were at, regardless of what the federal government told the state they could do. And so I think, again, you know, back to... Boy, but do we feel like the corporations will do that again? Yeah.

Perhaps, I mean, look, this is where the economic might of California is very helpful to some of these policies, right? These are places that, you know, as I said earlier, like California is the fourth largest economy in the world. If you look at the way that, you know, the state is fighting back on the tariffs as well. I mean, there are

Well, at the end of the day, the reason that a lot of these businesses, I would argue, have bowed to Trump is that they are worried about their bottom line. They're also going to be worried about their bottom line on the other side. Yeah. And they don't they don't make these decisions like based on elections. You know, they have many of these car companies have really put their chips on electric vehicles and lower emission rates.

And so they don't like this uncertainty, this back and forth from Washington either. And so they could voluntarily just maintain the standards that they have. If the waiver went away, they wouldn't be required to produce more polluting cars. They could still do what they want. But clearly that waiver is important as a tool to encourage them to do that. Yeah. A bit more on this. Bill in San Francisco. Welcome.

Hi, good morning. Just a quick time on the show and your guest's show as well. Just a quick comment and a question for your guests. The comment is...

I really feel like Democrats need to take a different stance, a stance a little more oriented towards an unapologetic push for the issues, whether they're kitchen table or core Democratic values. But to that point, my question actually relates to sort of a

Republican playbook model of states' rights and kind of pushing through. Right now, Trump is clearly using federal government and pushing through his agenda and even taking it to the Supreme Court. I'm wondering what California Democrats, both politicians and everyday Democrats,

can do to really bring these issues to the table, push them all the way up to maybe to the Supreme Court level. Just unapologetically put them through. Yeah. Hey, Bill in San Francisco, thank you. Thanks for listening to the shows.

Why don't one of you take that? I'm in particular, I think, interested in and, you know, Marisa, we have a show coming up on sanctuary cities. And this is a place where this kind of rubber may meet the road on the states versus and localities versus the federal government.

Yeah, and this is where I almost feel like on both sides of the aisle, there's like this be careful what you not wish for but actually do. Because so much of what Trump is doing, I mean, we asked Kevin Kiley about this this morning. Can you imagine if a Democratic president was trying to consolidate power and sort of rip away so much from Congress? On the other side of this, a lot of- Kevin Kiley, for those who don't know, Republican congressman. Yeah, Republican, yeah.

On the other hand, like you have these fights playing out over sort of state sovereignty that historically have been the purview of Republicans. Right. This idea that they shouldn't be forced, for example, to expand Medicaid because of the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare. That is the legal precedent there.

that some states are relying on to push back against things like sanctuary attacks by this administration. And so, you know, it was pointed out to us that the legal doctrine that the state is relying on for their tariff lawsuit to challenge, you know, Trump's power to unilaterally impose these tariffs is the same legal doctrine that won conservatives in Texas and

I think one other state lawsuits over student loan forgiveness that, you know, reversing what Biden had done under that clean air pollution standards, reversing what Obama had done. So I do think that a lot of the things happening here are sort of like it depends on which shoe the foot is foot foot.

I know what you're saying. But I do think that, you know, Republicans are more willing to move fast and break things than Democrats are. Democrats are, I think, are much more process oriented and following the rules. And I think that that's one of the things that Democrats are frustrated about. I mean, rank and file Democrats.

you know, that they don't see more, you know, pushing the boundaries of what the law is or trying novel things to try to get things done. But, of course, it's easier to do that when you're in power. Yeah.

Let's talk. One thing I'm really curious about from you two is, you know, we know that these tariffs have already impacted the ports here in California. And more of that is coming with fewer goods flowing into the country, specifically from China, but really from around the world. Are any of the people you're talking to when you talk to them about tariffs, are they preparing for this?

the material change in the situation that we're likely to see show up in the next few weeks? Well, we did talk to Senator Padilla, who, of course, represents all of California, about like, why aren't we hearing more from agriculture, for example, about these tariffs or about deportations or the raids, you know, any number of things that are happening, you know, from the Trump administration.

And, you know, those are, you know, happening in more traditionally red parts of California perhaps right now. But, you know, what he told us is they are calling him, you know, they're reaching out to him like, what can you do to help us? But they're not speaking out themselves. And I think that that's something that, you know, he...

he and other elected officials would like to see is more support for what they're trying to do from people who are maybe more aligned with the Republican Party. I think that's one of the big frustrations is that there hasn't been... What about Kiley, this Republican... Well, he acknowledges that, you know, there could be more oversight. There should be more oversight.

uh than we're giving and he also i think knows that if certainly the shoe were on the other foot that uh that's what i was going yeah i know no i mean i pointed out that you know there's that old story and it's it's true that when obama wore a tan suit to a white house briefing fox news was giving him all kinds of grief over that and you compare that to what's happening now so and the republicans are largely silent uh and so i do think that you know there's a lot of

that Republicans would have some of the debate that I think is happening, for example, over Medicaid cuts behind closed doors to bring that out into the open more. But in terms of your question, like how do you... Yeah, like what do you mean? Yeah, like how do you prepare? Like who would be preparing? I mean...

And how? Well, I mean, certainly you could be politically preparing for if the shelves start to be empty. Well, I mean, I think they're ready to talk about that on top of that. Christmas, Christmas presents. But I mean, these are also federal representatives. They're not the mayor of L.A. or the county supervisors overseeing that port or the one in San Francisco. I mean, and these are, you know, international, you know, trade events.

like it is sort of beyond the purview. I mean, I agree. I think that that is if you can't go into Target and get, you know, your hair dye or whatever, like that is going to be a huge story. And I would assume Democrats. I don't know. I don't

I don't want to be in the position here of like defending Democrats, Alexis. Like, I don't agree with some of it too, but I also feel like a lot of like what we're hearing is sort of reflects the challenge that they're in. On the one hand, Cory Booker goes and filibusters and some people go, this is what we need. On the other hand, people go, who cares? What did that do? So we held the Senate. Was anyone even watching? Like what, you know, like there is sort of one, that's why it's called being in the wilderness, right? When you're in this position. Yeah. Yeah. Um, well,

One other specific thing I want to make sure we get to. What about high speed rail? I mean, I know it's kind of a permanent topic of conversation in the state.

That is just a no-win for Democrats. I mean, you know, it's something that voters approved. It is like obscenely over budget, behind schedule. You know, originally voters were promised that this connection between L.A. and San Francisco would be up and running, I think, by 2020. You know, now they're just laying track between Bakersfield and Merced. And, you know, of course, Newsom is now, I think, talking about trying to connect that with the line that's being built from Las Vegas to Los Angeles.

You know, the federal federal funding has always been on shaky ground for this and never more so than it is right now. I mean, this is something that people like Kevin Kiley, Kevin McCarthy and many other Republicans have been using as, you know, tools.

evidence that Democrats don't know what they're doing, that California can't get big things done. I mean, you know, that's something that people like Ezra Klein have also pointed out. So I think high speed rail, I don't know how it's all going to get resolved, but it is not, I can't imagine in my lifetime, but...

I'm a little older than you. But nonetheless, you know, riding a train, a bullet train from L.A., San Francisco, there's just not the federal money for it. And I don't think that, you know, I don't think it would pencil out privately. There may be some version of it. But I think that, you know, as Trump pointed out yesterday, which I think is untrue, but this is why Newsom could never be president because of high-speed rail. I mean, Republicans love to, so to speak, rail on high-speed rail. I mean, it's just a favorite talking point. It is. There's no question. And Democrats.

kind of can't win now because we have spent so much money that if you walk away from it, then that's an opening. And if you don't, then that's an opening. And ironically, Republican elected officials in the Central Valley, at least mayors, you know, they like the jobs, you know, people like the mayor of Fresno, you know, they supported it. So it's just, it is just not a great talking point for Democrats. Yeah. Yeah. Uh,

There are so many things to talk about here. We've got the co-host of the KQED podcast,

Political Breakdown with us. They are actually in Washington, D.C. right now talking to folks. Scott Schaefer, of course, senior editor on the KQED Politics and Government Desk. And we've got Marisa Lagos, who's correspondent also on the KQED Politics and Government Desk. We've been taking your calls and comments. You know this is Forum, and I am Alexis Madrigal.

We want to get to a couple more calls as well. Let's bring on Catherine in Mountain View. Welcome, Catherine.

Hey, good morning. This is a great show. Thanks for having it. I just have the thought as a federal employee that the Democrats should let the Republicans break things and really show that because they have all arms of government, the presidency, the House, the Senate, all that.

You know, they should obstruct to prevent as much, but in the event that they – it's just they need to show that the pain is coming, and it seems like folks really don't change unless they experience the pain themselves, which is really unfortunate.

But, I mean, as a federal employee, I don't want the government to shut down. That affects my family, my life. But I just don't see how working with the Republicans to make things happen. So when Chuck Schumer, like, made the continuing resolution pass, I was, like, really disappointed in a way because, like,

I want the country to really see that the Republicans are driving this and they are breaking it. They are breaking it, not the Democrats or the Republicans, the Republicans. So I think that the Democrats really need to obstruct as much as possible and then show that the Republicans are breaking it. That gets to like...

No, it's a great call. And I think it gets to the fundamental tension that we see within, you know, probably more behind closed doors because they don't want to be fighting publicly. But about how to handle this, because I do think a lot of these folks, you know, here in D.C. got elected on the Democratic side.

make, you know, arguing that they wanted to expand these types of social safety net programs that are being cut and, you know, help their communities in the ways that they think are the best to do that. And I think I think you're right. I think that as a party, they're probably not as good as being a little more politically ruthless. One political lesson the last 25 years that an obstructionist minority party doesn't get blamed for problems.

Yeah, well, I don't know. I mean, Republicans, you know, certainly when they shut down the government, now maybe they weren't minority, but, you know, I think that, you know, people do pay enough attention that they know who to blame for certain things when they happen. You know, one thing about being here in D.C. is it's you hear some really poignant stories, direct people directly affected. I was in a cab the other day and.

The driver asked me what I did. She picked me up here at NPR. I said, oh, I'm a journalist. She said, oh, so am I. And she had worked for a TV station in Afghanistan that was funded by USAID. It's now no longer got defunded. And she has a green card, but she's worried that she can't get back in the

country. So you see how these cuts, I mean, this morning, you know, Kevin Kiley's aide had come from Tennessee to go work for the FDA and then he was dozed and now he's, you know, so these are real people. And so I think that's one thing Democrats think about when they, you know, decide whether or not to try to allow the government to shut down is, you know, this does affect real people. Yeah. Marisa, I wanted to ask you, we haven't gotten to Nancy Pelosi yet. In her 20th term, is that right? Yeah.

Is she going to run for 21st term, as she said? That is the question of the hour. I mean, she did not answer, Scott, the question.

Yeah, I spoke to her. I asked her that question when I talked to her on Monday. And, you know, we had talked for 20 minutes about all kinds of political issues and the election coming up. And then I said, is there anything that would stop you from running for reelection next year? And she goes, oh, I'm not here to talk about politics. I'm here in my congressional office. And I felt like, you know, if she was going to run, she would have just said she's running. So I don't know. If I had to place a bet, I would say she's not going to run for reelection. But, you know. We also heard from somebody else yesterday.

Fairly close to her that, you know, they think that she wants to be around to see Hakeem Jeffries to vote for Hakeem Jeffries to be speaker. If Democrats retook the House in 26, that would require her to run again. She also her daughter wants to run. Yeah. There's a lot of moving parts there. But, you know. Hmm.

She's also facing a challenge. I don't know how stiff it'll be from, you know, Shoykot Chakabarti, who used to be AOC's chief of staff. He's running against her. So I don't know. It'll be a thorn in her side, if nothing else. Last political question. Kamala Harris reemerged, gave a speech. Yeah. And people are sometimes talking maybe she'll run for governor in 2026. What do you guys hear?

Yeah, I mean, I don't know if she knows yet what her final decision is. Certainly that speech that emerged last week was more sort of national in focus. It does seem like she's seriously weighing the issue. Obviously, if she were to run for that, she would not be able to run for president in 28. I think what we can expect, you know, from a Democratic primary in the next election is going to be more robust and competitive. So she wouldn't, you know, there would be no, like, guarantee of anything for her. But...

But I yeah, I'll be watching and waiting to see Alexis. I'm super curious if she does decide to run sort of what her theory of the case is. Yeah. And there's not a lot of I don't think appetite in the Democratic Party higher ups, if you will, to have her run again in 2028 nationally. I think there is support for her to run for governor. There was certainly I went to that emerged dinner last week. She didn't mention I don't think California even once in her remarks. And

talked with reporters afterwards, sort of off the record, and again, did not focus on California. So to Marisa's point, if she wants to be governor, she has to convince voters that she wants to be governor, not that it's a consolation prize now that she's lost the White House. Yeah. We have been talking with Scott Schaefer, senior editor on the KQED Politics and Government Desk, and Marisa Lagos, correspondent on the desk. Thank you both so much for joining us. Yeah, thank you. Thank you.

I'm Alexis Madrigal. Stay tuned for another hour of Forum Ahead with Mina Kim. Funds for the production of Forum are provided by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the Generosity Foundation, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Support for Forum comes from San Francisco Opera. Experience the soaring highs and heartbreaking lows of bohemian life this summer in John Caird's beloved production of La Boheme. Puccini's most adored opera transports us into the heady bohemian world of 19th century Paris as we follow a circle of starving artists falling in and out of love, living for the moment. La Boheme runs June 3rd to 21st.

Learn more at sfopera.com. Greetings, Boomtown. The Xfinity Wi-Fi is booming! Xfinity combines the power of internet and mobile. So we've all got lightning-fast speeds at home and on the go! That's where our producers got the idea to mash our radio shows together!

Hey.

I'm Jorge Andres Olivares and I'm hosting a new show, Hyphenacion. Unlike many other hyphenated Latinos in the U.S., our cultures and our communities inform our choices, like with money. We had that pressure to be the breadwinner. Religion. I just think Jesus was what we would now define as Christ.

and family. We're not physically close and we're not like that emotionally close either. So join me and some amigas as we have easy conversations about hard things. Catch Hyphenación from KQED Studios wherever you get your podcasts and on YouTube.