🗳️ November 2026 General Election Ballot Analysis (I): Intro + State/National Offices

Here in California (and in Los Angeles in particular), we have an election coming up. You know what that means: Every election, I do a detailed ballot analysis of my sample ballot. This is where I examine each candidate and share my conclusions, and invite you to convince me to vote for the other jerk.  Because this is a long ballot, I’m splitting this analysis into a few chunks (note: links may not be available until all segments are posted):

1. State and National Offices (excluding judges)
2. County and City (Los Angeles) Local Offices (excluding judges)
3. Measures / Propositions
4. Judicial Offices (County and State)
5. Summary

Note: This analysis is NOT presented in the same order as the Sample Ballot (the ballot order makes no sense). I’ve attempted instead to present things in more logical order.

This part covers the Federal and State races:

• Statewide Offices: Governor ❦  Lt. Governor ❦ Secretary of State ❦  Attorney General ❦ Insurance Commissioner ❦  Controller ❦ Board of Equalization, 3rd District ❦ Supt. of Public Instruction ❦ Treasurer
• Federal (Legislative): US Representative, 32^nd District
• State (Legislative): State Assembly 40^th District

Before we start, a few introductory “general” comments:

• Israel. Although this is a state election, the DSA (Democratic Socialist faction of the Democratic party) has introduced the subject of Israel into the discussion. There are no problems with disagreeing with the behavior of the Netanyahu government; that’s equivalent to disagreeing  with what Trump does. It is also perfectly fine to call for Palestinian self-determination and a Palestinian led government in Gaza and the West Bank (without Hamas). Lastly, it is fine to call what the settlers are doing on the West Bank to Palestinians as wrong. HOWEVER: To move from there to arguments that Israel is committing genocide, to move from there to arguments that Hamas is justified, to move from there to anti-Zionism or arguing that the Nation of Israel should not exist … that’s moving into the area of antisemitism. See my post  Words Hurt, and Words Destroy. Given a choice between a candidate taking these positions and an equivalent candidate, I’m going for the candidate that supports the existence of Israel. However, I will not support a Trump-supporting candidate solely because of their position on Israel.
• Single Payer Health Care. The phrase “single payer health care” does not mean free healthcare. Remember that folks on Medicare pay premiums (often it is deducted from Social Security checks); those who earn more money can pay much more in premiums (look up IRMAA). If you are Medicare Part C, you may also pay different premiums based on the quality of your plan. Where Single Payer saves money is by having a single administrative apparatus to handle claim processing and payments, and a single set of rules regard payment for procedures and such. This saves a lot of overhead money (which reduces costs), and makes lives easier for the medical community because they have one set of rules. Additionally, if the government or a non-profit runs the single payer, costs are less because they don’t have to return profit to the shareholders. However, single-payer also makes it easier for the government to deny procedures and medicines they don’t like.
• SB1 Gas Tax. With the high price of gas, people like to complain about the gas tax. They blame the gas tax for the high price of gas in California. That’s not entirely true. As of July 1, 2025, the California SB 1 (Road Repair and Accountability Act) gasoline excise tax is 61.2 cents per gallon. This rate is adjusted annually every July 1^st based on the California Consumer Price Index to account for inflation.  Note that it is a fixed amount: That means that through all of the Iranian “Conflict”, it hasn’t changed. The gas tax has not made California gas more expensive, and the cost it adds to California gas is much less than folks think (there is also Federal Gas Tax). The Gas Tax goes to road repair and transit. It’s allocation is controlled by the California Transportation Commission (read my pages for more details), and there is transparency on how it is spent. There is an excellent website detailing transportation spending, and there is a specific map showing projects.  Two additional notes: (1) The SB1 Gas Tax does not go towards High Speed Rail; (2) the VMT is a separate proposed tax and currently electrics and hybrids also support the road through a specific fee on their registration. The VMT is a proposed tax for electric and hybrid vehicles only (different rates) that is based on miles driven; it is necessary because such vehicles do not pay into the SB1 funds.
• High Speed Rail. There are lots of complaints about High Speed Rail and its costs. Most folks don’t understand what has led to the high costs and delays, and it is important to understand what is happening (as it is common in many major projects). First, NEPA and CEQA (the Federal and State Environmental approval processes) add to costs simply because they require lots of public reviews and approvals. Those approvals were less in the Central Valley, which is where they started building the line, but are significant for other parts of the route, such as crossing the passes and mountains into Southern California. There are also major design issues related to the soil composition and utilities. Utilities are a big issue, and construction of the line means moving existing rail lines and power utilities (owned by private entities, who balk and delay at moving their lines). There is also the need to move existing roads and cross existing roads, which means involvement with city, county, and state construction projects and authorities. I know (for example) there was major rerouting of Route 99 in Fresno. There have been problems with HSR, and the reports are all available from the State Auditor. There have been financial problems, yes, but all large government construction problems have some level of those problems, and the eventual end result is worth it. That’s true of HSR as well: Having a fast HSR system between LA and the Bay Area will remove a lot of vehicles from the road, and provide significant environmental benefits and benefits to business.
• PAC Donations. A lot of folks are up in arms about PAC donations. I look at it another ways: Are the donations causing the candidate to change their position (is he serving the donors), or are the donations in alignment with the candidate’s position, and are those positions in alignment with the people they represent? So, for example, if a candidate is pro-choice and makes that clear, and receives donations from Planned Parenthood or a pro-choice PAC, then there should be no problem: things are in alignment. But if, for example, a candidate and their district was pro-alternative energy and solar, and then they receive donations from oil companies, and after those donations the candidate changes their position, then there’s a problem. Just accepting a donation isn’t a problem when they are legal donations and are publicly known, and those who attempt to imply otherwise are virtue signaling. Better than a candidate saying “I don’t accept PAC donations or corporate donations” is a candidate saying “I serve only my constituents, and promote those positions I believe in and that are Constitutions; I don’t change my positions to please my donors.” Additionally, I don’t “tar and feather” a candidate solely because they may receive money from AIPAC.
• When Was California At Its Best. A number of the Republican candidates are pining for the “good old days”, and believe that the days of prosperity were under Ronald Reagan. They should check their history. What brought California prosperity was the administration of the strong Democrat “Pat” Brown, Jerry Brown’s father, who left office in 1966. It was under Brown that the UC system achieved its excellence, and it was under Brown that the Freeway system was constructed and numerous homes were constructed. Reagan’s administration started the destruction of that system. Jerry Brown (in his first go around) tried to recover the budget through austerity. Governors since then have just been trying to recover things. As always, I highly recommend this book: “The Last Days of the Late, Great, State of California” by Curt Gentry. It explains well the pivotal election of 1966 that brought us the Republican party of today.

Lastly: Much of my candidate election analysis is based on the analysis I did for the primaries. It is unlikely that changes in a candidate’s positions between June and November are changes that will really stick. However, when my favored candidate didn’t move past the primary, I’ll do a deeper reexamination of the candidates positions to make a new selection. So expect to see a lot of the links you saw in the primary analysis.

🗳️

California Statewide Offices

Governor

The Governor of California serves as the chief executive of the state, heading the executive branch and directing the operation of California’s government.

⚫ Xavier Becerra (D)

Xavier Becerra served as the 25^th United States Secretary of Health and Human Services under President Joe Biden from 2021 to 2025. Becerra previously served as the 33^rd attorney general of California from 2017 to 2021 and as a U.S. representative from California from 1993 to 2017. Born and raised in Sacramento as the son of Mexican immigrants, Becerra received a Bachelor of Arts and a Juris Doctor from Stanford University. He worked as an administrative assistant for state senator Art Torres and as a deputy attorney general in the California Department of Justice in the late 1980s. He served in the California State Assembly from 1990 to 1992. First elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1992, Becerra chaired the Congressional Hispanic Caucus from 1997 to 1999 and the House Democratic Caucus from 2013 to 2017. In 2017, Governor Jerry Brown appointed Becerra to replace Kamala Harris as attorney general after Harris was elected to the U.S. Senate. He was elected to a full term in 2018 and served until he joined the Biden cabinet in 2021. (Wikipedia)

I asked Google AI to summarize Becerra’s negatives. It noted that Becerra faces significant criticism regarding his management at the federal level, an ongoing campaign finance scandal involving former top aides, and shifting stances on key policy issues like healthcare.

• • • Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Tenure: Critics and former colleagues from the Biden administration have attacked Becerra’s record as HHS Secretary, particularly his handling of major crises: (•) Migrant Child Crisis: Rivals, including Tom Steyer and Matt Mahan, have highlighted a New York Times investigation revealing that HHS lost contact with approximately 85,000 unaccompanied migrant children during his tenure. Critics allege Becerra rushed their release to sponsors while ignoring safety warnings, leading to some children being trafficked or forced into illegal child labor. (•) Inadequate Crisis Management: Some former Biden administration officials have characterized Becerra as “ineffective” and “not cut out” for high-level management, alleging he lacked urgency and was often unprepared when briefing the President on COVID-19 and border issues. (•) Lack of Health Expertise: During his confirmation and subsequent tenure, he was frequently criticized for having no medical or public health background despite leading the nation’s primary health agency.
    • Campaign Finance Scandal: Becerra’s gubernatorial bid has been shadowed by a federal corruption investigation: (•) Theft of Funds: In late 2025 and early 2026, his longtime former chief of staff, Sean McCluskie, and other associates were charged with conspiring to steal $225,000 from Becerra’s dormant state campaign account. (•) Management Scrutiny: Although Becerra has not been charged with wrongdoing and maintains he was unaware of the scheme, opponents argue the incident undermines his “managerial acumen” and raises questions about his judgment in choosing inner-circle staff.
    • Policy and Political Criticism: (•) Healthcare “Backpedaling”: While Becerra has long championed a single-payer system, he has recently faced backlash for “subduing” this message and sidestepping questions about whether he would support a state-run single-payer system as governor. (•) Record as Attorney General: During his time as California’s top prosecutor, some editorial boards labeled him the “top coddler of bad cops” for initially resisting certain police oversight efforts. Conservative critics also point to his office’s legal battles with religious groups, such as the Little Sisters of the Poor. (•) “Status Quo” Label: Rivals such as Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Matt Mahan argue that Becerra represents a continuation of current Governor Gavin Newsom’s policies, which they blame for California’s high cost of living and crime rates.

For some of these, the extent to which Becerra has major problems is unclear. But often, it is the appearance of problems that can take on a life of its own, and how those problems are addressed (or deflected) that matters. Becerra responded poorly in the primary debates, attempting to deflect responsibility vs acknowledging his role (even if his role was small). It is that deflection of responsibility that is a problem and may be hurting him. He has also had a problem with interrupting others during the debate, and not showing respect to others on the playing field. He talked over others quite a bit, and (as noted above) never noted where he might be wrong. That comes off as a bit bullying.

Where Becerra is better is his positions. He has a strong set of priorities on his website, most of which I agree with. For each, he details both his accomplishments in that area and what he will do at Governor. He has also described his policies well during the debates.

Becerra has a large number of endorsements. Our assemblycritter Pilar Schiavo endorsed him (as well as Thurmond). He has a fair number of elected officials, although not a lot of names I recognize. He has perhaps four construction unions, the Faculty Association, the Nurses (although I think they also endorsed a second candidate), SEIU (although, again, I think they have a split endorsement), and some physicians and dentists, and the California Medical Association. One would think a former HHS secretary would get more healthcare endorsements, and a former AG would get more law enforcement endorsements (although those often go to the Republicans). He has a lot of Democratic groups, plus Planned Parenthood and Equality California. He also has a number of environmental justice endorsements.

◯ Steve Hilton (R)

Stephen Hilton is a British and American conservative political commentator, former political adviser, and contributor for the Fox News Channel. He served as director of strategy for British prime minister David Cameron from 2010 to 2012. Hilton hosted The Next Revolution, a weekly current affairs show for Fox News from 2017 to 2023. He is a proponent of what he calls “positive populism” and is a strong endorser of U.S. President Donald Trump. He was a co-founder of the crowd-funding platform Crowdpac, but resigned as CEO in 2018. He was given a bursary to Christ’s Hospital School in Horsham in Sussex, before studying Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at New College, Oxford. Hilton became a U.S. citizen in May 2021. (Wikipedia)

As with the other candidates, I asked Google AI about Hilton’s negatives. Having not served in public office before, his negatives have a slightly different spin. Hilton faces criticism over his past political associations, his media background, and his close alignment with Donald Trump in a deep-blue state.

• • • Political “Chameleon” and Past Liberal Ties: (•) Crowdpac Controversy: Hilton has been labeled a “chameleon” by primary rivals like Chad Bianco for his “dark past” as the co-founder and CEO of Crowdpac, a crowdfunding platform. Critics allege the company fundraised tens of millions for radical liberal causes, Black Lives Matter protesters, and activists resisting the Trump administration. (•) British Political Record: Opponents point to his background as a top strategist for former UK Prime Minister David Cameron, where he was credited with pushing for government shrinkage and deregulation. Critics argue this reflects a “visceral disdain for the state” that could lead to a “wrecked economy” if applied to California.
    • The “MAGA Problem” in California: (•) Trump Endorsement: While Donald Trump’s “complete and total endorsement” has helped Hilton lead GOP polling, analysts suggest it may be a liability in a general election. In a state where two-thirds of voters “loathe” Trump, his close alignment is framed as a significant electoral hurdle. (•) Election Integrity Stance: During debates, Hilton has been called out for refusing to explicitly state that Trump lost the 2020 election, a stance that has fueled criticism of his democratic credentials.
    • Managerial and Policy Critique: (•) Lack of Government Experience: Democratic rivals like Xavier Becerra have attacked his lack of practical governing experience, calling him a “Fox News talking head” who has never balanced a budget the size of California’s. (•) “Unrealistic” Promises: He has been accused of “lying to voters” over central campaign promises, such as his claim that he can slash gas prices to $3 a gallon. (•) Tax Plan Skepticism: While popular with some, his plan to eliminate state income tax for those earning under $100,000 has been criticized as necessitating drastic, potentially harmful cuts to state services.

Of the negatives surfaced by Google AI, there are a few that are problems (beyond his broader MAGA positions). First, there is his lack of government experience, and his lack of state government experience. He became a citizen in 2021. His broad civic experience is in the British political system. That’s very different than the legislative system of California. He also doesn’t have a legal background; he doesn’t have experience working with the legislature; he doesn’t have executive experience; he doesn’t have experience balancing government budgets. He just doesn’t have the experience. Now, sometimes that can work (Arnold Schwarzenegger), but generally it doesn’t (Trump). I’m also bothered by his stance regarding the 2020 election. That election was done and settled, and the Congress selected a President. At this point, there should be no debating regarding its validity.

His policies are on his webpage. They are MAGA policies. I disagree with them. I shouldn’t need to say much more. Those values are not my values. I will, however, note that some of them do align with Democratic policies, such as speeding up the permitting process.

He has also proposed eliminating the DMV and slashing registration fees. This is pandering for votes, and is bad before California’s roads, which depend on those fees for maintenance funding. With his promises to cut taxes, cut gas taxes, and now registration fees, where will the state get the funds to pay for what it needs to do?

There’s also one recent, creepy thing: He has a political ads that is sexually ick and demonstrates a complete lack of sensitivity. Here’s how it was described in the LA Times:

A provocative, sexually suggestive ad by GOP gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton is drawing heat from his fellow Republicans while drawing millions of viewers online.
Two young women sit on a bed, with an LGBTQ+ flag in the background, with one urging the other to try a new experience.

“I can’t believe I’m doing this,” one woman says, and the other replies. “Don’t be nervous. It’s not that bad … Just try it. Look, give me your hand. Close your eyes, and I’ll do all the work.”

She leads the hesitant woman’s hand to mark her ballot for Hilton rather than Democrat Xavier Becerra, the front-runner in the race, and says, “Now lick it,” referring to the mail ballot envelope.

Hilton has policies that are incompatible with my values, and he lacks the experience required for the position. He also clearly lacks the sensitivity to be a governor for ALL of California.

Steve Hilton does not list endorsements on his website. He has the big one for his followers: Donald Trump. He also has the endorsement of the CAGOP. Other key endorsers are: Vivek Ramaswamy, Tom McClintock, Gloria Romero, the Nisei Farmers League, the Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC), Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (PAC), Israeli-American Civic Action Network, California Republican Assembly, California Rifle and Pistol Association, Rupert Murdoch, (the late) Charlie Kirk, and numerous Tech Industry Leaders.

📋 Conclusion

During the primary, I wrote: “Now, if you push me to select a favorite candidate, it is Katie Porter. I liked her when she announced, and I still like her. Alas, she is not polling that well, and she’ll likely land below the cutoff where I’ll be able to vote for her. My second choice is Tom Steyer. I don’t like the fact that he is a billionaire or his lack of experience. But I still think he’ll be better for California than Becerra.”

Well, neither of my candidates made it to the general election. So next, we go to the mantra of this election: Perfect is the enemy of Good Enough. Becerra isn’t perfect. He has a fair number of problems. But even with that, he is head and shoulders above above Steve Hilton, who would be bad, bad, bad for California.

Conclusion:  ⚫ Xavier Becerra (D)

Lt. Governor

Under California’s Constitution, the Lieutenant Governor serves as Acting Governor whenever the Governor is absent from the state, and automatically becomes Governor if a vacancy occurs in the Office of Governor. The Lieutenant Governor is also President of the Senate and votes in case of a tie.

The Lieutenant Governor serves as a voting member of the Board of Regents of the University of California, the Board of Trustees of the California State University system, and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges system. The Lieutenant Governor also sits on the Calbright College Board of Trustees.

The Lieutenant Governor also serves on, and rotates with the State Controller, as chair of the three-member State Lands Commission, which oversees the control and leasing of millions of acres of state-owned land, including offshore oil resources, as well as use and permitting for all navigable waterways in California. The Commission also manages state land-use planning and revenues, and related interstate issues. During alternate years, when the Lieutenant Governor serves as Chairperson of the State Lands Commission, she also serves as a member of the California Ocean Protection Council and as a non-voting member of the California Coastal Commission.

The current Lt. Governor is termed out, and is running for Treasurer, having opted out of the Governor’s race. So this is a wide-open race and there is a large field. For discussion, we’re going to break it into two tiers: The Top Contenders and the Others. I’ll note the LA Times and CalMatters have a good analysis of this race as well.

⚫ Fiona Ma (D)

Fiona Ma is the current Treasurer, and is termed out. She’s set her eyes on Lt. Governor, presumably as a stepping stone to the Governor’s mansion. The plans started early: In March 2019, she announced she would run for the 2026 California gubernatorial election. In March 2023, she pivoted and announced that she would be running for the 2026 California lieutenant gubernatorial election instead.

Her official bio notes that she was the first woman of color and the first woman Certified Public Accountant (CPA) elected to the position of Treasurer. Wikipedia notes that she previously was a member of the California Board of Equalization (2015–2019), the California State Assembly (2006–2012), and the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (2002–2006). She was the first Asian American woman to serve as California Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore. She was selected as Chairperson of the California Board of Equalization in 2016, and ordered three external audits of the agency. She earned a Bachelor of Science degree in accounting from Rochester Institute of Technology, a Master of Science in taxation from Golden Gate University, and a Master of Business Administration from Pepperdine University.

Wikipedia notes that in 2021, Ma was accused of sexual harassment and racial discrimination in a lawsuit filed by a former employee. The suit was settled in 2024 by the state of California for $350,000.

In terms of issues, the following is buried in her “Why I’m Running” page: “I’ll continue to fight to grow our economy, attract investment, and create high-quality jobs. I’ll work to make college more affordable and ensure seniors can age with dignity. Having lived with a pre-existing condition and seen my mother struggle with depression, I will continue the fight for healthcare access for everyone. And as the spouse of a firefighter, I will champion our first responders and public safety personnel so we can feel safe in our homes, work and walking on our streets. And as a real estate tax accountant, I am committed to build more housing so everyone can afford to live in our great state.” The problem is that most of these goals are not in the wheelhouse of the LG, other than as part of the economic plan.

She has some interesting endorsements, notably Eleni Kounalakis the current LG, and Shirley Weber, the current Secretary of State. She also has a lot of union endorsements. and  tons of organizational endorsements. She had the endorsements of our two local congresscritters, Brad Sherman and George Whitesides.  She is definately the leader on endorsements.

◯ Gloria J. Romero (R)

Gloria J. Romero is a former California state senator from 2001 until 2010 and was the Democratic majority leader of the California State Senate from 2005 until 2008. She was the first woman to hold that leadership position. In 2024, she joined the Republican Party. Her name recognition from Democratic days may lead Democrats to vote for her, even though she is the leading Republican candidate. Oddly, her website lists no endorsements. It really is unclear where the Republican endorsements have gone in this race, as the only other Republican with any real endorsements is Ebie Lynch.

Reading through her issues page, there’s little to none of the Conservative agenda one would expect from a Republican candidate. Nothing about “parent choice” or “girls’ sports” or being anti-DEI. I suspect that her recent conversion to Republican is a political move: As the only Republican candidate with name recognition, she is likely hoping to collect the Republican votes who are voting based on party without digging deeper. That’s good for California if she holds onto Democratic values, but it is unclear if that’s her plan. According to the LA Times, “She registered as a Republican in 2024 after splitting with Democrats over the push to oust President Biden as the party’s presidential nominee. She then endorsed President Trump.” I can’t vote for anyone that endorsed Trump, even if she had Dem values. That falls into the “Fuck Around and Find Out” category. She supported someone who destroyed this country; even if for political purposes, that showed bad judgement.

📋 Conclusion

My general criteria for this office (other than not being a Trump supporter or endorsing MAGA policies) is that the candidate must recognize the limitations of the LG position (i.e., not overpromise as if they were running for another office). The candidate should demonstrate broad support through a wide set of endorsements, and should have views aligning with mine. During the Primary, I narrowed the field to two candidates: Josh Fryday (D) and Fiona Ma (D). I ended up supporting Fryday, but he didn’t make it to the General election. Ma has experience, but her focus has been financial and accounting, not the environmental and public education aspects of the LG position. Further, other than running the Treasurer’s department, she has little executive experience. But, as with the Governor’s race, Ma is still significantly better than Romero. I cannot, and will not, support someone who publicly supported Trump and his positions, for that shows some level of acceptance of his behavior.

Conclusion: ⚫ Fiona Ma (D)

◊

Secretary of State

The California Secretary of State is an elected state executive officer established by the California Constitution. He or she serves as the state’s chief election officer, keeps the state’s key documents including the constitution and Great Seal, and keeps the state archives. Additionally, the secretary of state registers businesses in the state, commissions notaries public, and manages state ballot initiatives. The secretary of state is elected to four-year terms, concurrent with the other constitutional officers of California, and is restricted to two terms.

Given the shenanigans from the Republican party with elections, this is a vital office for California. I do not want a Trumpian Republican in this office. The current Secretary of State did a great job with the 2020 and 2024 elections. We need a Secretary of State that will vigorously defend the state’s election system from interference from the Trump administration and MAGA attempts to restrict who can vote, who will not put roadblocks or tests in the way of legitimate voters. I want a Secretary of State that will be fair and unbiased regarding the reporting of results. Our election system works in California, and I’m not inclined to change what isn’t broken.

The LA Times has an analysis of the race here.

◯ Donald P. Wagner (R)

Wikipedia notes that Wagner currently serves as a member of the Orange County Board of Supervisors, 3^rd district. He is the current board chair. He previously served as mayor of Irvine, California and as a Republican member of the California State Assembly, representing the 68^th district, which includes portions of Orange County. Wagner received a bachelor’s degree in English from the University of California, Los Angeles, and a Juris Doctor in 1987 from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law and was admitted to the California Bar in the same year.

Wagner’s website indicates that he fully supports the Voter ID initiative that just qualified for the ballot. If voters approve it, they would be required to show a government-issued ID each time they go to the polls, while mail-in ballots would need the last-four digits of an ID, such as a driver’s license. The secretary of state and county election offices would also be required to verify voters’ registration each time they vote. Currently, voters only need to provide an ID and Social Security number when they register to vote. Voting rights groups say the initiative will suppress turnout among eligible voters who don’t have the documents on hand, many of whom are disproportionately poor and people of color.

Wagner has also also raised concerns about the time-consuming ballot counting process, particularly how mail-in ballots can take more time with signature matches. His answer seems to be dialing back mail-in ballots. He has said he would roll back the practice of sending universal mail-in ballots to every voter, which the state made permanent during the COVID-19 pandemic, though that would require legislative approval. He said he’d also support legislation to move up the deadline to certify election results. Providing the last 4 digits of an ID without further verification actually increases the risk of fraud. Weber has argued that accuracy is more important than speed: it’s important to count every ballot and that most outcomes are known before she certifies the results anyway.

Wagner’s website says nothing about whether he will stand up to the Trump administration (i.e., would he be sending California voter rolls to DC for verification, which has a bad record of kicking out valid voters, as well as exposing private information). Being Republican, I doubt that he would.

He also wants to streamline small business applications, which seems reasonable.

He has a shitload of endorsements (and here), all Conservative, and driven by his support of Voter ID and the MAGA obsession with election integrity.

⚫ Shirley Weber (D) ⭐INC

Her Secretary of State bio notes: Shirley Nash Weber, Ph.D., was nominated to serve as California Secretary of State by Governor Gavin Newsom on December 22, 2020 and sworn into office on January 29, 2021. Voters elected her for a full term on November 8, 2022. Dr. Weber is California’s first Black Secretary of State and only the fifth African American to serve as a state constitutional officer in California’s 175-year history. Dr. Weber attended the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), where she received her Bachelor’s, Master’s and Doctorate degrees by the age of 26. Prior to receiving her Doctorate, she became a professor at San Diego State University (SDSU) at the age of 23. She also taught at California State University at Los Angeles and Los Angeles City College before coming to SDSU. She retired from the Department of Africana Studies after 40 years as a faculty member and serving several terms as department chair. Before her appointment, Dr. Weber served four terms as an Assemblymember representing California’s 79th Assembly District, which includes parts of the City of San Diego as well as several cities and communities in the San Diego region. Dr. Weber also served as a Member and Chair of the San Diego Unified School District and has twice served as a California Elector, including chairing the California College of Presidential Electors on December 14, 2020. She has fought to secure and expand civil rights for all Californians, including restoring voting rights for individuals who have completed their prison term.

Her priorities page indicates that her first priority is to defend voting rights. She wants to fix delayed financial filings in the SOS office, enforce rules equally, and ensure early bipartisan support for being fair and principled. She wants to encourage Californians to Vote: Running and aggressive outreach campaign to every corner of the state to urge Californians to get involved in the electoral process — from registering high school and college students to vote to helping members of the public get involved in our elections. She wants to work with local elections officials to strengthen, protect, and expand access to the ballot; to improve transparency in our elections, lobbyist registration, and campaign finance systems so that every Californian can make an informed decision about what issues, causes or candidates to support; to monitor and upgrade the Secretary of State’s cybersecurity policies to ensure our elections are protected from attempts to undermine our democratic processes; and to revamp the voter education outreach programs for the formerly incarcerated, especially in light of the passage of Proposition 17, which ensured Californians on parole have the right to vote, to ensure all Californians have a voice in upcoming elections.

She has pushed back against GOP attempts to restrict voters rights, and defended the right to voter privacy by refusing the Trump administration’s request for voter rolls (the lawsuit from the administration against her was subsequently dismissed).

She has a large number of endorsements, including unions, Democratic clubs, and elected leaders (although, surprisingly, not Newsom).  She has been endorsed by the SF Chronicle.

📋 Conclusion

This is one of the easier races. Wagner has given into the MAGA hysteria about elections and the need to show ID, implying fraud that isn’t there. Unstated by Wagner is a desire to disenfranchise or scare voters. Weber has done a good job, and it working to make the office better. She’s also defending California against the Trump administration. There’s really only one choice here:

Conclusion: ⚫ Shirley Weber (D) ⭐INC

◊

Attorney General

The Attorney General is the state’s top lawyer and law enforcement official, protecting and serving the people and interests of California through a broad range of duties. The Attorney General’s responsibilities include safeguarding Californians from harm and promoting community safety, preserving California’s spectacular natural resources, enforcing civil rights laws, and helping victims of identity theft, mortgage-related fraud, illegal business practices, and other consumer crimes. The AG also defends California’s laws when they are challenged in court.

The current AG, Rob Bonta, was appointed when Xavier Becerra departed to become U.S. Health and Human Services secretary in the Biden administration. This is a position where I do not want a Republican, for I wouldn’t trust a Republican AG to defend laws that are Democratic priorities. I also would not trust a Republican AG to defend California against Trump administration excesses.

⚫ Rob Bonta (D) ⭐INC

Before serving as Attorney General, Bonta spent more than eight years serving in the State Assembly. Before that, he worked as a Deputy City Attorney for the City and County of San Francisco, where he represented the City and County and its workers, and fought to protect Californians from exploitation. Before that he worked in private practice, where he protected Californians from racial profiling. Bonta was the first person of Filipino descent to serve as California Attorney General. Born in Quezon City, Philippines, Bonta immigrated to California with his family as an infant. Bonta grew up and attended public school in California before working his way through Yale University and earning his Juris Doctor from Yale Law School.
(Source: AG Bio)

On his campaign website, he states that his goals are to keep standing up to stop unlawful power grabs by the federal government, defend our immigrant communities, protect reproductive freedom, hold greedy corporations accountable, keep our communities safe from gun violence and fentanyl trafficking, safeguard our environment, and so much more. The site notes that whenever Trump and his administration attack our California, he steps up to defend Californians — taking the President to court more than 50 times in the past year to defend our most fundamental rights and protect billions of dollars in critical federal funding. Every single time Trump breaks the law or violates the Constitution, Rob sues — period.

I’ll note that I get the Attorney General’s newsletter, and he is keeping on top of the fight.

He has a large number of endorsements, including the governor, both senators, the Democratic members of the Congress from California, the Democratic members of the Assembly and Senate, and major city mayors. He also has backing from unions, labor leaders, and other progressive groups.

◯ Michael Gates (R)

Gates began his legal career in private practice as a litigator and trial attorney defending high profile cases for police and medical doctors in malpractice cases in court, eventually becoming a partner at an Orange County law firm. After establishing himself as an accomplished trial attorney, in 2014, he left a successful private practice to serve the public as the elected City Attorney of Huntington Beach, a position he held for ten years after winning citywide elections in 2014, 2018, and 2022. In 2025, Michael was appointed Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, where he oversaw approximately 100 attorneys across Employment, Voting and Elections, Housing and Civil Enforcement, and Criminal sections.

According to his issues page, his focus will be full implementation of Prop 36 across the State. He writes, “The will of the people will be heard, crime will be illegal again.” Very Trumpy. He also wants to protect communities from Sacramento (he claims overreach). He wants to support law enforcement, pretty much unconditionally. He wants to combat fraud, waste, and abuse. He wants to “aggressively enforce and defend all federal laws to protect our young girls and parents in our sports and education systems.” He wants to tackle homelessness, viewing it primarily as a drug and mental illness issue. He’s concerned about election integrity and second amendment issues. He wants to enforce environmental laws at the local level.

You know what is missing from his issue page? Civil rights. Protecting the rights of citizens. Protecting the rights of legal immigrants. Protecting the rights of LGBTQ+ folks. He also doesn’t talk about protecting consumers from fraud. His focus is protecting business, not people.

Needless to say, he has loads of Republican and law enforcement endorsements.

📋 Conclusion

Again, this office is an easy choice. The Republican candidate is MAGA and clearly unacceptable. The Democratic candidate has the endorsements, the skill and the record.

Conclusion: ⚫ Rob Bonta (D) ⭐INC

◊

Insurance Commissioner

The California Insurance Commissioner (1) oversees and directs all functions of the Department of Insurance; (2) licenses, regulates, and examines insurance companies; (3) answers public questions and complaints regarding the insurance industry; (4) enforces the laws of the California Insurance Code and adopts regulations to implement the laws; (5) and enforces the department mission to ensure vibrant markets where insurers keep their promises and the health and economic security of individuals, families, and businesses are protected. The position is especially important right now, with the ACA and Health Insurance marketplace issues.

But note that the focus of the job is insurance. This is not a job that deals with things like homelessness or public safety. This is also one of those positions that does require a legal background, as well as the ability to deal with numbers (although a CPA is not required). Lastly, the position requires someone who is not to close to the Insurance industry.

Useful Resources:

• Calmatters: “Who wants to be California’s insurance commissioner? Your guide to the candidates“
• LA Times: “Your guide to the California insurance commissioner’s race: Who will replace Ricardo Lara?“
• Insurance Guide: “California Insurance Commissioner Race Has Diverse Field Amid ‘Insurance Crisis’”

⚫ Ben Allen (D)

Ben Allen represents the 24^th Senate District, covering the Westside, Hollywood, South Bay, and Santa Monica Mountains communities of Los Angeles County. Ben was first elected in 2014 and is now serving his third term in the State Senate. Ben chairs the Senate’s Budget Subcommittee #2 (Resources, Environmental Protection, and Energy) and co-chairs the Legislature’s Environmental Caucus, is a member of the Legislative Jewish Caucus, chairs the Legislature’s Joint Committee on the Arts, and the Senate Select Committee on Aerospace and Defense. He previously served as Chair of the Environmental Quality Committee (2019-2024), Chair of the Education Committee (2017-2019) and Chair of the Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee (2015-2016). Prior to his election to the Senate, Ben served as President of the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District Board of Education, lecturer at UCLA Law School, and worked as an attorney at the law firms of Bryan Cave LLP and Richardson & Patel and at the nonprofit Spark Program. While at law school, Ben served as the voting student member of the University of California Board of Regents and was a summer judicial clerk with the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Prior to law school, Ben worked in Washington DC for the Latin American team of the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI), and then as Communications Director for Congressman Jose Serrano (D-NY). Ben has a Bachelor of Arts degree magna cum laude in History from Harvard University; a Master’s degree in Latin American Studies from the University of Cambridge; and a Juris Doctor degree from UC Berkeley.
(Source: 24^th District Senate Biography)

Before I explore further, the one thing that strikes me about this biography is that there is precious little experience or interest related to insurance and insurance issues. Three terms in the State Senate means he is termed out. This strikes me less of a desire to be Insurance Commission, and more the desire to retire a position in Sacramento. However, according to the LA Times, he represents the Palisades fire zone and, since the blazes, has authored bills that provide tax relief to fire victims and raise payments for personal property losses.

He does appear to have an insurance related plan. His ideas are a lot of what was discussed in the CBS Governors Debate: modernizing rate-setting; faster rate reviews; community hardening; data driven resilience; and climate accountability. He wants to improve insurer compliance, increase transparency, and get people off the FAIR plan. All of these are good ideas.

According to Calmatters, he “would take a more comprehensive approach to risk reduction, including by creating funding sources such as state-backed loans for hardening homes, and by bringing together insurers, builders, local governments, firefighters and the state to work on solutions. As part of reducing risk, he wants to restrict new construction in high-risk zones, saying developers who are building in such areas are “basically freeloading off the rest of us.” He also wants to “carefully and sensitively” find a way to incentivize those already living in risky areas to move elsewhere.”

According to the Insurance Journal, Allen “believes California’s insurance system is at a crossroads. To restore a solvent, competitive marketplace while keeping rates fair and affordable, we must strike the right balance between protecting consumers and ensuring insurers can sustainably operate in the state. [He] will stabilize the insurance market by modernizing rate setting and streamlining rate review timelines so decisions are made within months, not years, [wanting] to keep insurers in California and be able to write policies people can afford.” In terms of immediate changes, he would expand our on-the-ground claims support during disasters. He would bring more predictability to the rate review process, resolving filings in months, not years, with clear timelines and consistent standards. He would also implement forward-looking catastrophe models, with transparency and strong oversight.

He has a significant number of endorsements, including unions, environmental groups, significant elected leaders (both Senators, both congresscritters that cover Northridge). He seems to be the favored Democratic candidate.

◯ Jane Kim (D)

Kim is a former San Francisco Supervisor. She also served as the California Political Director for Bernie 2020 and as a Senior Fellow at both the Sanders Institute and the Young Elected Officials Network, a program of People for the American Way. Over the last four years, Jane Kim served as the California Director for the Working Families Party. She received her B.A. from Stanford University and her J.D. from the U.C. Berkeley School of Law.

According to Calmatters, Kim “has three main proposals around more government involvement, the main one to create “natural disaster insurance for all.” It would be funded by a portion of policyholder premiums that insurance companies would pass along to the state. The state would manage the fund, which would guarantee fire and flood coverage. Insurance companies would continue to provide coverage for other risks. It’s not her idea — New Zealand has the same system, and it allows the country to invest the premiums in preventive measures, she said. Establishing such a system in California could allow the state to invest profit from premiums that would have gone to insurers’ shareholders in its communities instead.” She would also establish a public option for auto insurance by expanding eligibility for an existing program that provides low-cost insurance to drivers who make less than $38,000 a year, and she wants to provide Medicare for kids believing that California should centralize all insurance authority within the insurance department instead of having managed health care handled by the Managed Health Care Department.

In their endorsement of Wolff, the SF Chronicle noted this about Kim: “The most aggressive is former San Francisco Supervisor Jane Kim, the California director of the Working Families Party, who wants to effectively blow up the system by establishing a state-run single-payer disaster insurance program with guaranteed coverage. She would also require insurers to pay interest on delayed or underpaid claims and push the state to offer guaranteed health care coverage for children.” The Chronicle noted that “her proposals are almost certainly dead on arrival — the fiercest consumer advocacy group, Consumer Watchdog, opposes the disaster insurance idea.”

She’s endorsed by Bernie Sanders and extremely large set of unions, elected officials, and organizations, including CAIR and Democrats for Palestinian Rights.

📋 Conclusion

During the primaries, I ended up supporting Patrick Wolff (D). I felt that Jane Kim just wanted to blow up the system. I noted that Allen was a termed-out legislator who was turning his attentions to the Insurance Commissioner office. I supported Wolff because he knew the Insurance Industry by building his own brokerage, although he had no experience working with the legislature to achieve specific goals, or navigating the arcane halls of Sacramento to get things done. I thought Allen knew more about the Insurance world and its regulation than Bradford, although I liked Bradford’s notion of equity in the availability of insurance, as that is a significant issue. Alas, Wolff didn’t make it into the General election.

That leaves us with two Democrats. In the Primary, Ben Allen was my second choice, and I had eliminated Kim. For the General, the decision is between Allen and Kim. For an effective Insurance Commissioner, which is more important: The ability to work in Sacramento, to work with the legislature and the Governor… or a desire to blow up the system? Allen knows how to work in Sacramento. Kim’s experience is local to San Francisco. She also doesn’t have any Insurance background. She seems to be leaning on progressive endorsements (although surprisingly, she doesn’t list the DSA as an endorser, even though they have endorsed her).

Given the DSA endorsement here, I’m going back to the discriminator I had in my introductory post: All things being equal, I’m supporting the moderate mainstream Democratic candidate over a DSA-endorsed candidate, especially given the nature of endorsers of both candidates (Jewish organizations support Allen, no Jewish organizations support Kim).

Conclusion: ⚫ Ben Allen (D)

◊

Controller

The State Controller is the Chief Fiscal Officer of California, the sixth largest economy in the world. She helps administer two of the largest public pension funds in the nation and serves on 78 state boards and commissions. These are charged with duties ranging from protecting our coastline to helping build hospitals. The Controller is the state’s independent fiscal watchdog, providing sound fiscal control over more than $100 billion in receipts and disbursements of public funds a year, offering fiscal guidance to local governments, and uncovering fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars.

Is this a good position for a Republican? I’m unsure. I’d be worried about their sabotaging the works. That’s the level of distrust they have created these days. To the (R) candidate I say: Convince me.

Useful Sources:

• LA Times, “Your guide to the California state controller race: Democrat Malia Cohen faces challengers“

⚫ Malia Cohen (D) ⭐INC

Malia M. Cohen was elected in November 2022, following her service on the California State Board of Equalization (BOE), the nation’s only elected tax commission. She was elected to the BOE in November 2018 and was Chair in 2019 and 2022. As Controller, she continues to serve the Board as its fifth voting member. Prior to being elected to the BOE, Controller Cohen served as President of the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco. As a Supervisor, she served as Chair of the Budget and Finance Committee and the Audit and Oversight Committee. During this time, she also served as President of the San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System (SFERS), which at the time was a $23 billion pension fund. Cohen was born and raised in San Francisco and attended public schools. She received her bachelor’s degree in Political Science from Fisk University and a master’s degree in Public Policy and Management from Carnegie Mellon University. She also worked for the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
(Source: Controller Office Bio)

Cohen’s issues page shows a large number of issues. Reading through all the issues, they seem to conflate accomplishments from her time as San Francisco supervisor with what she can do as controller. There is precious little described on her pages about her acting in her role as fiscal watchdog.

The LA Times notes “The state’s fiscal watchdog oversees the intake and outtake of public funds and audits departments across the state. Unlike the state auditor, the controller has political independence and doesn’t answer to the state legislature. The controller uses audits and reports to hold entities and other governmental agencies accountable.” The Times notes that she has fallen quite a bit short from her campaign promises. When asked for her accomplishments, Cohen said her accomplishments include getting the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) published closer to its due date; for years, this report has been published months after it is due. A 2024 CalMatters report said it had been late for at least six years. Cohen said part of the issue is that departments are late in handing over their information. She also led a task force that was convened by court order following a massive fraud scheme involving charter schools in San Diego. However, she failed to audit homelessness programs and determine whether the billions of dollars the state is investing is addressing the crisis. She failed to investigate the Employment Development Department, the Department of Motor Vehicles and homelessness programs, claiming the state legislature already was reviewing the agency.  She also faces criticism over her handling of a controller-led program that returns uncashed checks, funds from old bank accounts and other money owed to state residents.

She has a large number of endorsements: primarily Democratic elected officials, unions, and associated progressive and Democratic PACs and organizations.

◯ Herb Morgan (R)

Morgan is an investment professional with nearly four decades of experience in financial markets. He founded Efficient Market Advisors (EMA), one of the nation’s earliest ETF-based investment firms, which grew to manage $1.5 billion in assets under his leadership. He was appointed by Mayor Jerry Sanders to the San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System (SDCERS) Board, where he collaborated with fellow trustees to overhaul financial reporting and restore robust corporate governance. He was subsequently elected Board Chair twice by his peer trustees. He is a Board Member of The Private Shares Fund. His employment record is spotty, with lots of short stints at various investment firms. He has a BA in economics from UC Santa Cruz. The Anthem Financial Club describes his background as: “Prior to becoming CEO of EMA, Mr. Morgan held the post of Senior Vice President of Advisory at Linsco/Private Ledger Financial Services, Inc. Mr. Morgan was also Sr. Vice President with Dreyfus as well as Sr. Vice President with ING Funds group. (Then known as Pilgrim Funds) From 1990 to 1996 Herb held positions with J&W Seligman & Co. Herb Morgan graduated from The University of California, Santa Cruz with a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Economics. (Honors)”

Morgan wants to launch a Cal-DOGE to root out Fraud, Waste, and Abuse. We all saw how well that worked at the Federal Level. A central pillar of his plan is to implement a open ledger, blockchain-based public finance platform. Every state agency ledger would be published online and on-chain in real time, giving every Californian immediate access to spending data. He wants to implement meaningful, outcome-based audits, not years after losses occur, but while programs are operating. He wants to empower the public — journalists, watchdog organizations, academics, and everyday citizens — with direct access to financial data that has long been buried behind delays, bureaucracy, and technical barriers.

According to the LA Times, Morgan would use the controller’s office to develop a real-time reporting system that would use blockchain technology and artificial intelligence, allowing the public to review the price and recipients of contracts. He wants the Controller’s office to withhold funds from departments until there are improvements at the agencies. He also wants to be “far more aggressive” about issuing warnings to the governor and the state legislator when budgets are presented that rely on questionable financial assumptions and projections.

He has a large number of endorsements from Republican elected leaders, and Republican organizations.

📋 Conclusion

Malia Cohen has been a disappointment. It is clear she has failed in her responsibility as a fiscal watchdog, and needs to do more audits and oversights as part of her role. This would have been an ideal time for a candidate with appropriate financial background to take over the role: for example, this would have been great for Fiona Ma given her CPA background. But, alas, we don’t have that good alternative. Morgan does have economics experience, but only at the BA level. His experience is not in audits, but in investment management and banking. His notions about using blockchain to solve all problems are (1) idiotic, and (2) so five-years ago. Blockchain is a log of transactions; it doesn’t provide magic transparency. Further, his mention of a Cal-DOGE loses me immediately, as I think DOGE was a complete and utter mistake. This leaves only one option.

Conclusion: ⚫ Malia Cohen (D) ⭐INC

◊

Board of Equalization, 3^rd District

The State Board of Equalization (BOE) was created in 1879 by constitutional amendment and charged with the responsibility for ensuring that county property tax assessment practices were equal and uniform throughout the state. Through the years, legislative changes expanded the BOE’s role to administer additional taxes and fees. Effective July 1, 2017, the BOE returned to its Constitutional responsibilities. The BOE is responsible for property tax programs, alcoholic beverage tax, tax on insurers, and private railroad car tax. The BOE is also constitutionally responsible for the Alcoholic Beverage Tax and Tax on Insurers. By way of agreement, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), performs billing and audit services for those programs.

Being on the Board of Equalization, which traditionally has been an office that was ignored, has recently become a stepping stone to other financial offices—notably, State Controller and State Treasurer. Hence, the large field of candidates when there isn’t an incumbent in the way.

⚫ Mike Gipson (D)

Gipson was elected to the Carson City Council in 2005. He served as Mayor Pro Tempore before running for the California State Assembly in 2014, where he has served since. Today, Assemblymember Gipson represents the 65^th Assembly District which includes the areas of Watts, Willowbrook, Compton, Carson, North Long Beach, Harbor Gateway North & South, Harbor City, Wilmington, and San Pedro. In 2015, Assembly Speaker Emeritus Anthony Rendon appointed Gipson to serve as his right hand in the role of Assembly Democratic Caucus Chair. He served until July 2023, making him the longest-serving Assembly Democratic Caucus Chair in California State history. Gipson has since been appointed to chair the Revenue and Taxation Committee by Speaker Robert Rivas. Gipson also Chairs the Select Committees on Ports and Goods Movement. He also serves on the select Committees on Domestic Violence; Automation and Workforce Development; California-Mexico Bi-National Affairs; Los Angeles County Homelessness; Nonprofit Sector; Restorative Justice; Social Determinants of Health; State Parks; Status of Boys and Men of Color; and the California Creative Economy Workgroup. Gipson is also an active member of the California Legislative Black Caucus as well as Chair of the 76^th Council of State Governments West (CSG West) which currently represents 13 states. Gipson is now serving as Vice-Chair for the Council of State Government National (CSG). Gipson also serves on the Standing Committees of Governmental Organizations and Insurance. He attended LA Southwest College, and got a BA from the University of Phoenix. It appears he is termed out of his assembly district.

His campaign website states “Throughout my career in the State Assembly, as City Councilmember and as a Police Officer, I have been a committed champion for my constituents in providing resources and funding for important programs in communities that have been historically underserved. As the longest-serving Assembly Democratic Caucus Chair in California history, I helped lead our state through significant budget shortfalls, while always protecting working families and our most vulnerable communities. That’s why I’m running for Board of Equalization, to ensure big corporations pay their fair share, protect taxpayers, and increase transparency at the BOE.” However, his website says absolutely nothing about what he specifically plans to do on the BOE.

He also does not appear to be playing fair or campaigning fair. He has exaggerated his record as a police officer. There are claims he supported an opponent in this campaign because her name was similar to his strongest competitor. And just as I was posting this, his campaign did a FB post: “Mike Gipson stood up to ICE and fought to protect abortion rights. Yvonne Yiu was a Trump Republican during his first term who refused to vote for abortion rights and was sued for financial misconduct.”. Well, I looked up whether Yiu was a Republican. She ran as a Democrat in 2024 for SD 25; and as a Democrat in 2022 for Controller.  I could find absolutely no evidence that Yiu was a Republican.

He has a large number of endorsements: labor unions, Democratic clubs, the black caucus, police and fire, and a large number of elected officials.

◯ Samuel Sukaton (D)

Sukaton has a BA in History from UCLA. He directed Senator Bernie Sanders’s 2020 campaign in Inland Southern California. He’s led climate budget investment and redistricting campaigns with California Environmental Voters. Most recently, as Lead Organizer for AFT Local 1521, the LA Community College Faculty Guild, he’s organizing students and representing faculty in the Los Angeles Community College District — the largest community college district in California He’s worked before with the California Public Utilities Commission, Energy Commission, Air Resources Board, and Natural Resources Agency, gaining first-hand experience with how California’s investments in clean energy, climate resilience, and innovative land use move us all toward a sustainable and healthy future.

He’s one of the few whose website talks about the Board of Equalization in somewhat specific terms. He states that at the BOE, he will focus on: (•) Fair and uniform assessments – making sure homeowners and small businesses are treated equally across counties. (•) Transparency and modernization – upgrading systems so taxpayers can see where every dollar goes, as well as opportunities to raise new revenue with things like split-roll. (•) Fiscal responsibility – ensuring state and local revenues are managed efficiently and ethically. (•) Equitable growth – supporting policies that strengthen local economies while safeguarding the environment.

His website doesn’t list any endorsements. However, Ballotpedia does. They include groups called Mamdanification, Reject AIPAC from City Council to Congress,  and Stop arming Israel. He touts support from Bernie Sanders, although I could not find a DSA endorsement.

📋 Conclusion

In the Primary, I got the impression that there were a lot of folks looking for an easy stipend for meeting attendance, and possibly public office that allows them to move up (or suck at the public teat). Most of the folks running had no qualifications for this office other than that they breathing. I concluded that there were only two qualified candidates: Mike Gipson and Yvonne Yiu. Gipson is only qualified because he was chair of the Revenue and Taxation Committee; his educational background has nothing to do with taxation. I didn’t like Gipson, primarily because he wasn’t campaigning in a fair and honest manner. I supported Yiu, but alas she didn’t make it to the primary. Instead, we got Sukaton. He does talk about the BOE in specific terms. But he’s an organizer, and doesn’t have a tax background. His endorsers are problematic. So I’m going with the qualified candidate.

Conclusion: ⚫ Mike Gipson (D)

◊

Supt. of Public Instruction

The superintendent oversees the California Department of Education (CDE) and, by extension, all of the state of California’s public schools. He or she executes the policies of the California Board of Education, which is the school system’s primary governing body. The superintendent also manages the operational side of the school system; he or she licenses teachers, maintains school property, and fulfills other administrative duties. The CDE and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction are also responsible for enforcing education law and regulations; and for continuing to reform and improve public elementary school programs, secondary school programs, adult education, some preschool programs, and child care programs.

Note that this is officially a non-partisan position; however, if the analysis indicated a leaning I’ve noted it.

Useful references:

• LA Times, “Your guide to the California state schools superintendent race: wide-open race to replace Tony Thurmond“
• Calmatters, “Superintendent of Public Instruction“

⚫ Richard Barrera (NP/Leans 🐴)

Barrera is a longtime school board member in San Diego Unified, the state’s second-largest school system, a senior advisor to Thurmond and before that was a local labor union executive. He has a BA in History from UC San Diego, and an MA from the Harvard Kennedy School Executive Education. He has an extensive bio on LinkedIn.

Per his website, his priorities are (1) Build a Strong, Sustainable Teacher Pipeline; (2) Expanding Early Childhood Education; (3) Secure, Sustainable Funding for Stronger Schools; (4) Empowering Communities to Fund Their Schools—Because Our Kids Can’t Wait; (5) Making Housing Affordable for Educators; (6) Building Schools Where Every Student Belongs; (7) Prioritizing Mental Health in Every School; and (8) Delivering Equity: Real Opportunities for Every Student. This is a great set of priorities.

He has four measures to achieve goals: (1) a sustained, statewide instructional push in early literacy and math that is treated as an implementation focus, not a short-term initiative; (2) to treat attendance as part of the academic strategy; (3) stabilizing the educator workforce; and (4) make college and career readiness a central, measurable outcome ofK–12 performance, not a secondary consideration.

He is the leader by far in fundraising. The LA Times shows him having raised 1.3 million by 5/1; his closest rival, Al Muratsuchi (NP/D) has only raised $734K. He’s only spent around $300K. He has an extensive list of endorsements, including the current SPI, Tony Thurmond, loads of elected and public officials (most school based), school administrators, the Bee family of newspapers, Democratic clubs, a number of unions (most importantly, the California Teachers Assn).

◯ Sonja Shaw (NP/Leans 🐘)

Shaw’s bio raises a number of red flags, so I’ll quote and flag them: “…when California sidelined parents 🚩 during debates over closures and mandates, she could no longer just stay a spectator. Sonja’s resilience and faith drove her to fight for our families. Starting out by attending local school board meetings to advocate for her daughters, Sonja’s fight for our children grew into a movement. Elected Chino Valley Unified School Board President in 2022, she championed parental rights 🚩, winning landmark battles against Sacramento’s extreme policies 🚩, including a lawsuit from Attorney General Rob Bonta. Backed by countless parents, she proved families, not politicians, should steer education. Now running for California State Superintendent in 2026, Sonja aims to fix a system where only 46.7% of students read at grade level, transforming schools into launchpads for dreams. A wife and mom guided by faith 🚩, she’s committed to fighting for every child’s future.”

Her issues: (1) Protect Our Daughters; (2) Fix Our Schools (“Radical ideologies distract from learning”); (3) Put Families First (“Mask and vaccine mandates ignored families’ well-being”). Her measures, according to the LA Times, to bring success are: (1) Start with reading; (2) Give teachers time to teach–too much of their time is spent on paperwork that has nothing to do with student learning; (3) be honest about results.

She is endorsed by the usual Republican groups, and Republican leaders, and a small number of School Board leaders.

📋 Conclusion

This is actually an easy choice, for a position that is somewhat meaningless. Shaw has loads of MAGA red flags. Barrera has union ties, school board ties, and has worked with the SPI (and so knows the SPI apparatus). As I said, an easy choice.

Conclusion: ⚫ Richard Barrera (NP/Leans 🐴)

◊

Treasurer

The Treasurer provides financing for schools, roads, housing, levees, public health facilities, and other crucial infrastructure projects. The Treasurer managed in excess of $3.2 trillion of banking transactions in 2021. One of the primary duties of the Treasurer is to provide transparency and oversight for the state’s investment portfolio and bank accounts. Funds held in the treasury that are not needed immediately are invested in safe, liquid securities designed to use the state’s financial resources efficiently. As such, the Treasurer oversees an investment portfolio that has averaged more than $100 billion, about one-third of which are funds beneficially owned by more than 2,200 local governments in California. In addition to these banking and investment activities, the Treasurer serves as the agent for the sale of all state bonds and is the trustee on a majority of the state’s outstanding debt.

Useful reference:

• LA Times, “Your guide to the California state treasurer race: Who will replace Fiona Ma?“

◯ Jennifer Hawks (R)

Hawks is a retired businesswoman. She serves as president of Palo Alto Republican Women Federated, an organization that uses educational activities and community engagement to encourage women to participate in government. She does not have a more detailed bio available.

Her emphasis appears to be finding waste, fraud, and abuse. She believes there is $435B in waste in California, and she focuses in on high-speed rail, transportation and road spending, and homelessness. [Knowing, as I do, how transportation spending works I think she is wrong, and just doesn’t understand what leads to the high spending]

She wants to prioritize oversight and accountability, transparency, debt discipline, and fiduciary responsibilities.

She has a large number of Republican endorsers, including Carl DeMaio (a MAGA hero), the American Independent Party, and a number of county Republican party organizations. She is also endorsed by CA-GOP. Her website plays music, unasked.

⚫ Eleni Kounalakis (D)

EK (it is easier than remembering how to spell Kounalakis) had been planning on running for Governor as she termed out of Lt. Governor, but pivoted when the Governor field grew and she saw there was no path.

It is hard to condense EK’s experience from her “about” page. She earned an MBA from UC Berkeley, then joined her father in building one of California’s most respected housing development firms, AKT Development. In 2010, she was appointed by President Obama as U.S. Ambassador to Hungary. After her return to California, she was elected Lt. Governor.

She indicates that her top priorities would be to manage the state’s finances with responsibility and experience, and to build more housing and the infrastructure to support it, to protect our pensions and manage our investment portfolio with transparency and accountability.

Her website does not give a lot of details on her plans. In terms of negatives, she does have some ethical concerns regarding blind trusts, leasing office space to the state, and renovation fundraising.

She has a lot of significant endorsements. These include Governor Newsom and the outgoing Treasurer, Fiona Ma. She also has significant National and Labor endorsements. She has a slew of elected officials and Democratic organizational endorsements.

📋 Conclusion

This is an easy decision. Hawks subscribes to the MAGA Fraud Waste and Abuse mantra, and doesn’t really understand how government works. Kounalakis clearly has the support of the Democratic establishment, but has a weak plan and doesn’t do a great job of selling herself.  But she isn’t MAGA. Caballero was stronger in the primary, but didn’t make it to the general. As I wrote for the primary, “I won’t have a problem if Kounalakis makes the general”.

Conclusion: ⚫ Eleni Kounalakis (D)

🗳️

Federal Offices

US House of Representatives, 32^nd District

Hopefully, from our civics classes, we know the duties of our congressional representatives. Under the current administration, those duties are even more important: To stand for the power of the Congressional Branch in the face of power grabs by the Executive Branch. To stand up for Democratic values and the rights of the people in the face of MAGA. To stand up for the rights guaranteed to the people and to citizens by the Constitution. To uphold their oaths of office. To make sure that the district’s interests and values are represented in Congress (and this district is liberal).

For a while, with the recent California redistricting, I though we had moved into George Whiteside’s district. I even got a Whitesides yard sign. A good part of Northridge did move. But it appears we have remained in the 32^nd District with Brad Sherman. Sherman was first elected to Congress in 1997, meaning he has been in Congress for almost 30 years. That’s good and that’s bad. The good is that he has a lot of seniority and power. The bad is that he’s older, and likely a bit more disconnected from the more progressive younger voter. Perhaps I should clarify here that I am distinctly NOT in the MAGA camp: I think Trump and the values of Project 2025 are completely wrong. I simply cannot support someone who supports Trump or his values. That said, I am also more of a political moderate believing that compromise is necessary to move forward. While I would love to have many of the heavily progressive goals NOW, I recognize that won’t happen, and we will need to move towards them incrementally.

Additionally: I am a supporter of the nation of Israel, although I disagree with what Netanyahu has done and how he has gone after Gaza and Palestinians. But Israel should have the right to exist, and I support a two-state solution. I will have difficulty supporting candidates that are promoting anti-zionist leanings as a pretext for saying we should not support Israel.

So far, I’ve liked what Brad Sherman has done. He has regular town halls. He lives in the valley, and goes to valley events. He is here for his constituents, and he is representing our values (even though he is older). So I think for any candidate to gain my vote in the primary, they would need to be demonstrably better than Brad Sherman.

⚫ Brad Sherman (D) ⭐INC

According to his bio, Brad Sherman attended UCLA, and graduated from Harvard Law School. He worked as a CPA and Certified Tax Law Specialist, and headed up California’s Board of Equalization. He is one of only four CPAs serving in the House , and co-chairs the bipartisan CPA caucus. He was then elected to Congress in 1996, and has a whole list of accomplishments. For all of those progressive goals that the other candidates are just talking about, he has been involved in the legislation that has advanced them forward.

I read through his issues page. The overall impression that comes from it is that not only does Brad Sherman support relatively progressive causes, he is actively implementing them. He’s not fully progressive: there’s no mention of Medicare for all, or wealth taxes, and there are no pledges to reform Congress and not accept PAC money. But even at that, he has clearly been effective on moving the progressive needle forward. According to his congressional website, he has some significant committee assignements and caucus memberships.  His issues page on his congressional website has bit more information. He has been working to protect Medicare and Social Security. He is supporting alternative energy. He is working to simplify tax filing, and even under the 47 administration, has brought results to California.

Then there are the issues he doesn’t talk about. According to Google’s AI summary, Sherman consistently raises a significant portion of his campaign funds from Political Action Committees (PACs), with PAC contributions often accounting for over 40% of his total funds, frequently originating from industries like finance and defense. In the 2023-2024 cycle, 42.30% of his funds came from PACs. Quiver Quantitative has a list of his PAC donors here. According to YouTube, Sherman supports Medicare for All as a necessary, long-term solution to reform the U.S. health care system, arguing it is needed to address rising premium costs and coverage gaps. He advocates for this approach as a superior alternative to the limitations of the Affordable Care Act, aiming for a rational, universal system. The cyptocurrency folks hate Sherman. According to the Intercept, while many other Democrats have sought to chart a middle path, Sherman has in the past called for an outright ban of cryptocurrencies. According to a press release from during the Biden administration (i.e., BEFORE the issue became trendy),, Sherman has consistently supported strengthening rules against insider trading, including stricter regulations on financial activities for members of Congress. According to the Google AI, Sherman generally approaches wealth inequality by advocating for policies that support labor unions, increase taxes on corporations and high earners, and protect consumers from financial exploitation. He often emphasizes the need for a tax system that does not favor billionaires and large corporations.

In short, the impress I get on the issues is that he’s a realistic progressive. He broadly supports progressive goals, but isn’t as aggressive on going after them, and often compromises to move the needle forward. His attitude is to get something done, as opposed to waiting for perfection.

He has the bulk of endorsements, including broad union endorsement and Democratic organizations. He has the support of a large number of elected leaders and community folks.

In terms of negatives: There are accusations that he has had a toxic office environment, and some staffers (not Sherman) have been accused of misconduct. There was also the aforementioned viewing of scantily clad women incident, which he claims was due to the X algorithm. However, other than that one incident, there haven’t been other reports so there doesn’t seem to be a pattern of behavior there. That’s similarly true for the office environment issue: there doesn’t appear to be a pattern of problems. Isolated incidents happen to everyone: what’s key is a pattern of behavior. Lastly, the progressive folks don’t like him because of his acceptance of PAC money, and his strong support of Israel. They also don’t like his age.

◯ Larry Thompson (R)

This fellows website, unsurprisingly, raises a number of red flags. He starts out with “I am a Christian first. A Conservative second. A Centrist Republican third. I am a member of Stand With Crypto.” Stand With Crypto is a nonprofit advocating for clear, common-sense crypto regulations; in other words, he supports crypto. He states “I will always protect family values.” That’s coding for a anti-abortion, anti-women, and anti-LGBTQ+ agenda. His positions are across the board, but strongly conservative. He has the endorsement of the Republican party, and is the only Republican candidate. He does not mention Trump: either agreeing with him or disagreeing with him. He has no political background.

He does not understand what a congressman does, writing “Repairing the many potholes in our streets including Ventura Boulevard, Coldwater Canyon, Laurel Canyon, Benedict
Canyon, Beverly Glen, and Topanga Canyon Boulevard”. City street repairs are the job of the city, not the Federal government. Department of Transportation funds do not go to pothole repair on city streets. He also writes: “Fight immediately for a futuristic, high-speed monorail service running alongside the 405 freeway with a beautiful view, connecting people traveling between the San Fernando Valley and the Westside of Los Angeles”. This ignores the fact that the studies have shown a monorail would be ineffective and not serve as many transit riders.  He also believes “addressing the homeless problem primarily as a mental health issue”, which aligns with Bianco’s mistaken views on addressing the unhoused.

His website is poorly designed and hard to navigate, and feels outdated.

I don’t feel alignment with his values.

📋 Conclusion

Having read through the backgrounds and positions of all the candidates, and likely reflecting the fact that I’m a political realist, I support Brad Sherman. Yes, he is older, but he remains effective in Congress, is active in the district, and doesn’t seem to be beholden to PAC interests over the interests of the district. I see no problem with PAC money if you agree with what they were going to do anyway (at least under Citizens United). I don’t see any red flags from my research that provide reasons to vote him out of office, and none of the other candidates has presented a coherent argument as to why he needs to go. He has seniority in Congress, which equates to power. Until we reform that system, electing a newbie only dilutes the power of the district. I cannot support Thompson due to his values.

Conclusion: ⚫ Brad Sherman (D) ⭐INC.

🗳️

California Legislature

Member of the State Assembly, 40^th District

Pilar Schiavo was first elected to the assembly in 2022, so this would be her third term. Under Proposition 28 (passed in 2012), California Assembly members elected on or after November 6, 2012, may serve a maximum of 12 years in the state legislature. These 12 years can be served entirely in the Assembly or a combination of service in the Assembly and Senate. So she’s a third of her way through her total career in the state legislature. When first elected, I thought she was a bit green, but she’s matured in office and has been reasonably effective. When there is a reasonably effective incumbent, I’m looking for a cogent argument from an opponent about why the incumbent must be replaced, and that opponent must have positions that resonate with my views. I’m also looking for a modicum of experience, although at the assemblycritter level, that experience can be at the city/county level and can even be organizer experience. Assembly positions are often the first step of a larger political career.

◯ Rickey Hayes II (R)

Reading through Hayes’ bio, there’s a fair amount of puffery and inflation. He was a Journeyman Lineman with IBEW Local 47, but the bio inflates that blue-collar worker position into “one of the most respected and demanding professions in the energy sector” and “an energy infrastructure leader and executive, [playing] a key role in building, maintaining, and modernizing California’s power grid.” He also served in the Marines. There is no evidence of community political activity. He was born and raised in Compton and Long Beach, but currently lives in Santa Clarita.

He does not have an issues page, nor does he discuss his legislative priorities. He makes no argument against the incumbent. His website states that he is running ” to restore public safety, strengthen California’s infrastructure, and fight for working families who feel left behind by Sacramento. He believes in commonsense leadership that prioritizes safe communities, affordable living, reliable energy, and opportunities for the next generation to succeed.” That says nothing specific.

Since the primary, he has added endorsements. Mostly Republicans and GOP leaders.

⚫ Pilar Schiavo ⭐INC (D)

Before serving in the Assembly, Pilar was a Nurse Advocate and Small Business Owner who helped provide access to healthcare—including abortion and reproductive healthcare—to more than one million people. She also co-founded an organization that has delivered more than 50,000 meals to people in need, helped secure homes for veterans and seniors experiencing homelessness, and kept our communities safe. As I recall, she moved to the district from Northern California. In the Assembly, she authored a number of bills, quite a few of which were chaptered (signed into law). None were vetoed.

Her campaign website does not have an issues or a priority page. Her legislative page shows that she’s on a fair number of standing and select committees. Calmatters has a good summary of who is funding her, gifts she’s accepted, and bills she has passed. She also has a good summary of what she had done on progressive safety. She has a courage score of 83, and seems to be rated well by other progressive organizations.

She has a large number of endorsements, including significant labor union support.

Back in 2022 during her first election, this is what I wrote:

Schiavo is a Small Business Owner and Nurse advocate, with 20 years in the labor movement, 13 of those with the California Nurses Association. She currently lives in Chatsworth.  She doesn’t appear to have prior political experience. During the primary, I didn’t like her issues page. The problem was not her positions. At a high level, they are solidly in the Democratic camp. However, they don’t show a depth of understanding of the issues, and everyone seems to be targeted with an endorsement (“… and this is why she’s endorsed by …”). Water conservation is a good example of this. Here’s what she says: “And finally, drought continues in California, with 2022 on track to be the driest year in California history. AD40 has been struggling with severe drought. We face a real threat that there may not be enough water for our local communities. Pilar will fight for state investment to ensure our community has the water we need – in water table infrastructure, rainwater capture, and water reuse. That’s why Pilar is endorsed by the Sierra Club and California Environmental Voters.” But the issue is much more complex in the district, from groundwater contamination from the Santa Suzanna labs, to the need for water for fighting brushfires. I fear she really doesn’t understand the issues well enough, but her heart is in the right place. She has strong Democratic, labor, and union backing.

Her Republican opponent is attacking her for being very progressive (i.e., in the Bernie camp, supporting single payer health care).  There is some truth to some of those claims. But I’d rather have that then the Republican values. Her linked in page shows her as being based in Oakland. An article from one of the Mother Lode papers shows her background is Northern California. She’s being pushed by a group to get moms in office.

For my highway page, I monitor what the legislature is doing. For a newish assemblycritter, Schiavo has been introducing some very strong legislation, and getting it through the legislature. For the 2025-2026 legislative session, 19 of the 41 bills she introduced were chaptered. I’m impressed in what she has gotten done.

📋 Conclusion

In some ways, this is an easy choice. I don’t like the Republican candidate. Schiavo has been effective in the Assembly, bringing funds to the district. I can uncover no reason to vote against her, and especially no reason to replace her with a Republican (especially when I disagree with the positions of the Republican candidate).

Conclusion: ⚫ Pilar Schiavo ⭐INC (D)