All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 15, 2021 - Epoch Times
30:37
California Legislator Warns About State’s Extreme Leadership | CA Assemblyman James Gallagher
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The year 2020 has been an eventful year for a lot of us.
We want to talk to you about the legislative body in California.
What was going on there?
What happened this year?
It was a very different legislative session.
You know, there were some good things that happened that we can talk about, but there was also some, you know, pretty significant shortcomings.
You mentioned there is a gap between the people of California and Sacramento.
When do you think things will change?
Increasingly I think people are seeing from this state government that there's a much more top-down approach that really costs people.
It really affects their everyday life.
Is there some people in that community that are working with you guys?
The reality is the more moderate voices I think need to become more assertive and they need to gain more influence because right now they really don't have a whole lot of sway.
And what do you recommend to the audience that are watching, the voters in California?
I would just argue that the progressive agenda is really a socialist agenda, and it's one that we've always known in America does not work.
And I would just really ask voters, really listen to what the proposals that we're outlining and ask yourself, could this be a better way forward?
Could this be a much better California?
Certainly, you know, into the future and for the next generation, if we start making the changes now.
California is heading in a problematic direction as the state dismisses essential issues.
My guest today is James Gallagher.
He's the state assembly member representing California's third district.
Today he discusses this year's legislature's accomplishments and the need for them to be more assertive when it comes to state policies.
Welcome to California Insider.
James, it's great to have you on.
Welcome.
Good to be with you.
Thank you for having me.
We want to talk to you about the legislative body in California and wanting to know, year 2020 has been an eventful year for a lot of us.
What was going on there?
What happened this year?
Well, obviously this legislative session was very different than previous ones.
Mostly because of COVID-19.
We ended up recessing our legislative session in March and did not come back until early May.
There was also much more limitations on the ability of people to come into the Capitol, for instance, to lobby for their interests or to come and participate in public hearings.
So it was a very different legislative session.
There were, I think, some good things that happened that we can talk about where the legislature came together and I think passed some good policy in response to the pandemic.
But there was also some pretty significant shortcomings that myself and I think many of my other colleagues Felt like could have been much better, maybe most notably how we could have responded more strongly and asserted our authority vis-a-vis the governor.
Now, what were the good things that passed, in your opinion?
Well, look, I think despite the unique circumstances, you saw this legislature come together in the budget.
For instance, in pushing back against the governor's more draconian cuts, specifically to education, and we helped restore a lot of money to education, taking into account the significant investments that the federal government had provided to help support things like childcare and our higher education.
I think you saw us come together in the area of insurance, especially in the aftermath of these wildfires, that people will be able to keep and maintain insurance.
There's more reform that needs to be done in that area, but I think we passed some good measures this year on those lines.
In the area of workers' comp, During COVID, it's been a special circumstance.
How do you deal with people who become ill with COVID-19 in the workplace?
I think we passed a reasonable compromise on that that ensures that workers are protected, but also that is reasonable for business.
There was a more radical proposal that died in the legislature, and we were able to put something that I think was more of a bipartisan compromise.
So that was important.
In the area of elections, even though Kevin Kiley and I had our lawsuit regarding this issue, I think the one significant thing that happened is the legislature came together and in plenty of time before the election, and this is part of our argument in the lawsuit, Legislature came forward and passed what I think was a reasonable compromise to provide for safe and accessible elections.
And, you know, that was the result of us working together.
I didn't like everything that was in that legislation, but ultimately it's the legislature is the one who should decide how we're going to conduct our elections, and we did do so with, you know, several months before the election.
And then I think in the area of mental health and homelessness, we passed some measures, you know, reasonable reforms along those lines that are going to help us better address, you know, mental health being kind of the biggest issue when it comes to homelessness.
Many people are on the street that really just need to be able to be in treatment.
Okay.
And so we passed legislation this year that's going to help us get people into the needed treatment that they need.
And so that they're not out on the street and being a harm to themselves and other people.
So, you know, I think those are some of the issues where, you know, some of the areas where I think there was, you know, good measures that were developed by the legislature, good policy.
And now, what didn't go as planned, or what were the measures that were passed that were not really that great?
Well, I think that, you know, one of the biggest things is that I think we could have asserted ourselves much more strongly against the governor.
You know, the governor was continuing to really legislate through executive order, and I thought that the legislature could have been more assertive And pushing back and saying, no, that's not your power.
And in fact, you know, this is, you know, we could have passed resolutions.
We could have, you know, more aggressively, we could have even pulled funding from the governor because ultimately we do control the purse.
And when, for instance, he was spending, you know, a billion dollars on a mask deal that nobody really knew about, I think we could have asserted ourselves more strongly in pulling back some of the money and funding.
Until he more appropriately cooperated with the legislature on those funding decisions.
So I think that was one real big miss.
I mean, we recessed in March.
I really felt we could have found a way to come back sooner, you know, through remote process or whatever it may be.
I mean, obviously, we have great technology now that's allowing me to even do an interview with you.
Certainly, I think we could have done that and still had full public input and transparency that would have allowed us to operate and do our essential function as a legislature.
I think that was one major miss.
The other thing is that when we did come back in May, one of the first things that was told to us was, oh, you need to limit your bills Do COVID-19 only measures?
And the problem with this is, one, it turned out to not really be true, because if you were an influential Democrat, you were able to push through bills that had nothing to do with COVID-19, and some of them were some pretty bad policies.
But it also on our end, I feel like limited, you know, just certainly COVID-19 has been the biggest issue addressing us in 2020.
But it's not the only issue.
You know, we need to make needed improvements to our infrastructure.
For instance, I had a bill that would have helped build a water pipeline that would support the Town of Paradise that you know was decimated by a wildfire in 2018.
You know, it would have helped them to recover their water system.
And that was put on hold because it wasn't COVID-19 direct.
Meanwhile, a bill like Senator Weiner's legislation that Allowed for relationships between minors and adults with less than 10 years difference.
It allowed those who were perpetrators of those type of relationships and who were taking advantage of youth to not be listed as sexual offenders, sexual predators on our list in California.
Certainly that had nothing to do with COVID-19 in addition to being completely horrendous policy that passed this year.
And, you know, vital infrastructure bills and other, you know, policy items that I think really need to be addressed right now.
You know, we still have this bullet train that is moving forward that a lot of people feel like is...
costing billions more than...
And where is that going, the bullet train?
A lot of people are curious what happened to it.
The only positive thing is that there was some pushback on that in the legislature this year that sort of took away some of the ongoing authority to move forward with that project.
But it really hasn't been stopped as of yet.
And they've only built some portions of it.
The cost overruns on the project are astronomical.
So we're hoping that we'll be able to stop that.
But meanwhile, you have that project.
And our California aqueduct, for example, that transports water throughout the state that Southern California absolutely needs for its water supply, that infrastructure is falling apart.
We have subsidence of the aqueduct where that canal is not transporting water as efficiently as it used to.
We need to make substantial investments in our dams and other infrastructure.
We need to build new water storage.
These are all things that we should be working on right now, and they shouldn't have stopped just because of COVID-19.
On that note, I've actually been interviewing a lot of people and some people have raised concerns over businesses leaving California and wealthy people leaving California and taking their businesses with them.
Have you guys done any studies on that?
Have you guys been working on that?
Well, I don't think the legislature has done any specific studies on it, but it It is continually brought up by myself and my Republican colleagues that we have a serious problem.
We are losing businesses every year.
Perhaps most notably here recently, Elon Musk announced that he left California and moved to Texas and is actually looking at doing more investment in Texas than in California.
So the leading electric vehicle Manufacturer in the nation and California billing itself as being the most green state, even those businesses don't want to do business here in California and are leaving.
It's a big problem.
And we're seeing more and more of that.
We are going to lose the revenue.
One of the dirty secrets is that California relies very heavily on its highest income earners.
You know, a lot of our revenue comes from high income earners.
And the more that we lose, you know, of those individuals, the less revenue we're going to have to pay for all of the different things that we expect, whether it's education, public safety, infrastructure.
So, you know, we better start paying a whole lot more attention to our business climate here in California.
And then you add to that during this COVID-19 pandemic, we have seriously hamstrung our small business community, which is the backbone of the economy in California.
You know, with different shutdown policies, with the way that we focused, I think, almost exclusively on closing down small businesses and not allowing them to operate while, you know, some of the big box stores have basically been able to operate unimpeded.
It's having a substantial impact on our small business community.
Now have you been able to get the attention of the colleagues on the other side of the aisle?
It's something that we certainly emphasize a lot as Republicans.
The standard answer that I feel like I get from Democrats is, oh no, people always want to come to California.
And almost like, oh, it's not really that bad.
We still have revenue.
And we're going to continue to be leading in whatever category it is that they want to be leading in, whether it's from climate change to some other pet project.
The reality is, look, you can be a leader in climate change without destroying your business.
You can be a leader in climate change policy and not increase the cost of living beyond what people can actually afford to pay.
That's where we're at in California.
We have businesses leaving, but we also have those that remain here and those of us who are trying to make a living and raise a family and We put our kids through school.
The cost of living continues to go up.
And many of the reason for such is the regulations, the policies that are put in place by the Democratic majority.
I'll just give one example.
What they call the renewable portfolio standard, which requires our utilities to purchase more and more power from solar and wind, has led to our bills going up 80% for residential consumers.
You know, that's the bill, the PG&E bill or the SDG&E bill that you pay continues to just go up in California, and that's not slowing down.
The cost of gasoline.
Democrats raised the gas tax.
Increasing the cost for you to purchase gas for your vehicle.
Yeah, the governor now introduced an executive order banning all gas powered vehicles.
Nobody knows how that's actually going to be feasible.
It's certainly not economically feasible for many people that live in California to have to, you know, purchase a fully elect vehicle.
They're more expensive.
And so there and again, there's just kind of this disconnect.
Between the average Californian and these policies that make it more and more unaffordable for all of us.
Where are these policies coming from?
Is there a special interest behind them or is it just coming from ideologies?
How do they come up with these policies?
Yeah, well, you know, there is a very strong special interest presence in Sacramento.
And I think, you know, some of the bigger ones that you see are the public employee unions.
I would, you know, probably the most notable is the California Teachers Association has a lot of influence.
They have killed many education reforms.
You know, whether it's regarding teacher tenure, where we were trying to say, hey, look, you know, for teachers, maybe their tenure should be not two years, but maybe four years, so that we can ensure that we have a good teacher in the classroom who's qualified and is able to, you know, teach our kids.
California Teachers Association killed that bill.
A couple years ago.
We have the Sierra Club, a very, very significant influential environmental lobby group that, for instance, kills a lot of bills that allow us to do responsible forestry management.
I would say over the last couple decades, there's been many measures, mostly by Republicans, To allow us to get into our forests, then remove vegetation and do responsible forestry management.
They are either killed by the Sierra Club in committee or they're significantly watered down.
I actually had a bill just last year that would have allowed us to have a full California Environmental Quality Act exemption For these types of projects, Sierra Club lobbied and that bill wasn't even allowed to move out of committee.
And then just this year, we had the Bear Fire.
One of my local fire response groups had already put together a plan to do thinning and vegetation removal around the community.
We lost the community of Barrie Creek in my district, and they were not able to go forward primarily because they didn't have an exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act.
So these type of policies where these interest groups are really stopping good policy from moving forward are having real practical effects.
We lost the community of Barrie Creek I wouldn't say it was completely because of this, but it was certainly a significant factor that we weren't able to do responsible forestry management practices in and around that community.
You mentioned there is a gap between the people of California and Sacramento.
There's a disconnect.
When do you think this disconnect could get, when do you think things will change?
I think you're already starting to see it.
We have a recall effort that is going right now against the governor.
It's gaining a lot of traction because people are very upset with what they're seeing as unconstitutional government.
Edicts that are done by executive order, more and more power over people's lives.
And look, we live in a democracy, a republic, where there's supposed to be checks and balances against authoritarianism, where civil rights are supposed to be respected.
And increasingly, I think people are seeing from this state government that there's a much more top-down approach that really costs people.
It really affects their everyday life.
Like I said, what they're going to pay when they go to fill up their tank, what they're going to pay when they have to pay their electricity bill every month.
What kind of jobs they can work.
You know, AB5 is one that's been highlighted a lot.
It's really impacted people's flexibility in how they want to work.
Many more people are finding the convenience of doing gig economy work that allows them to have side jobs, allows them to have greater flexibility with their family.
But we impeded that because, you know, The Democratic majority and the governor decided that, no, we don't really like how you're working, and we think that you should work kind of the traditional 8 to 5 work week and not be an independent contractor.
I think people are increasingly frustrated by sort of this autocratic, dictatorial approach that they're seeing out of Sacramento.
And I hope that grows.
I mean, we are certainly the voice in the Republican Party for more freedom and the ability to make those decisions as you see fit.
To raise your family, to get the education that you believe is best for your child.
To work in the industry and the type of work that you think is best for you and your family.
And to really just have greater freedom from government control.
And so I think, you know, more and more people are really waking up to the fact that that's what they want to see and they're not seeing that in Sacramento.
They're seeing that the policies out of Sacramento are making it harder for them to thrive in the way that they would like.
And I'm hopeful that eventually that will have an electoral result.
In which, you know, there will be a change in the types of people and really the ideas behind the people who are being elected to California state government.
Now is the super majority that the Democrats have, is it just one voice or do you see some people in that community that kind of want to, that are paying more attention to businesses leaving regulation?
Is there some people in that community that are working with you guys?
Yeah, there are moderate voices within the Democratic caucus.
I wish they were more significant and influential.
You know, you definitely see people like, I would say, Jim Cooper, Blanca Rubio, Jim Frazier.
You know, there's definitely a group that's, you know, that tries to be that moderating voice within the caucus.
But the reality is the progressive wing of the Democratic Party really controls.
And they're the ones that push these sort of really out-of-touch policies.
And when push comes to shove, They get their majority and they pass it on.
And then they have a progressive governor in Gavin Newsom who essentially signs just about everything that they push out.
And so I certainly encourage and I work across the aisle.
The thing about the legislature is there's always a lot of different ideas and bills.
And so on one issue, I might be completely opposite a Democratic colleague, but on another one, we might be aligned.
And I've found ways to work across the aisle.
But the reality is the more moderate voices in the Democratic caucus, I think, need to become more louder, more assertive, and they need to gain more influence because right now they really don't have a whole lot of sway.
And what do you recommend to the audience that are watching, the voters in California?
What I would say to the voters of California is I would ask them, you know, how is this working out for you?
You know, I mean, we've had now two decades of complete democratic control of our legislature.
Their ideas are the ones that have That have really won the day and that control the policy in this state.
And I would have to ask you, is that really working out for you?
Let's look around.
We have skyrocketing costs of living.
Harder and harder to pay the bills.
We have jobs leaving California.
More and more people unemployed.
And not just because of COVID-19.
I would look at how has COVID-19 been Responded to and addressed in this state with the closures of many businesses.
And when people are laid off, did you get your unemployment check or was it held up at the EDD? Did you face all kinds of complications?
Is your right to work as an independent contractor being impeded?
Is that affecting your life?
Look around at our infrastructure.
Is it thriving infrastructure or is it falling apart?
Are your roads falling apart?
Are your schools what they should be?
Do you feel like your kids are getting the opportunity that has always been the American dream?
I would ask them, I mean, look at the wildfires that have plagued us.
Our state is literally burning down around us.
What has the Democratic leadership done to actually stop those things from happening?
The governor says that the answer is to ban your ability to drive a gas-powered car.
I would argue, hey man, let's get in there and get out the fuels, the underbrush and the timber and the dead and dying trees that are causing the fires.
You know, our electrical system, we have rolling blackouts now.
I mean, is this the kind of 21st century modern democracy that we expect?
And I think if I would venture that the answers to those questions for many Californians is no, this is not working out for us.
And what I would ask you then is, well, if that's the case, then let's try something different.
And I think we as Republicans have a lot of answers to those questions.
We believe in education reforms that allow you to choose a better school for your child and a better opportunity for your child.
We believe that you should have the flexibility to work in the way that works best for you and your family.
We believe that we have the solutions to investing in our infrastructure and making it the modern 21st century infrastructure that we should all expect.
We believe that we have the solutions to make sure that our government programs operate efficiently in the way that they're supposed to and not accept a status quo like we've seen at the EED and the DMV, for instance.
So we as Republicans have solutions for how we can move forward and make our democracy stronger than ever before and to make our society more prosperous.
And I would just really ask voters, really listen to the proposals that we're outlining and ask yourself, could this be a better way forward?
Could this be a much better California, certainly into the future and for the next generation, if we start making the changes now?
Do you think there is a way for the Democratic Party to actually eliminate that wing that is very influential and very progressive?
Do you think there is a way for them to do that?
There's a way.
I guess it just comes down to, is there a will?
And I would just argue that the progressive agenda is really a socialist agenda, and it's one that we've always known in America does not work.
You know, greater government control over people's lives, you know, the Socialism really leads to everyone being equally poor.
Socialism leads to, you know, what we're seeing right now where, you know, some animals are more equal than others.
Those that have power can go out to restaurants and eat outdoors and go to the French laundry while you are forced into draconian and following draconian measures.
In your own life.
It leads to an inequality of elites, you know, versus the plebs.
And so, you know, this progressive agenda that's trying to promise you everything has never worked.
In fact, historically, it has led to greater inequality and to the decimation of civil rights.
And I really hope that the Democratic Party comes around.
The Democratic Party used to be the party of the working person.
The party of the downtrodden and looking out for civil rights, looking out for the working man and making sure that those opportunities and the ability to move up were always there.
It didn't used to be necessarily the party of government-only, top-down answers.
And I think there's been a frustration, actually, among, like, kind of the traditional Democrats and the progressives because they, you know, they see this.
And so I'm hopeful that maybe within that party You know, that traditional Democratic base will be successful.
But what we're seeing with the rise of leaders like AOC and the squad in Congress, Nancy Pelosi, you know, even Kamala Harris as the Vice President now, these are all very progressive leaning forces that ultimately are going to take our country down and lead us more on a path to socialism,
And to, you know, the same problems that we've seen historically with that, which is poverty, a gross inequality, and basically systems that, you know, crumble and fall apart.
Well, it's great to have you on.
Yeah, it's great to be with you.
And, you know, thanks for having me.
And I'd be happy to come back in the future.
▲
Export Selection