Southern California News Group compiles candidate responses on tackling California's projected budget deficit, with a Gen Z leader advocating for constitutional reform and bureaucratic overhaul to address inefficiencies and structural spending issues.
Ahead of the June primary election, the Southern California News Group compiled a list of questions to pose to the candidates who wish to represent you.
You can find the full questionnaire below. Questionnaires may have been edited for spelling, grammar, length and, in some instances, to remove hate speech and offensive language. Do you believe balancing the state budget should rely more on spending cuts, new revenue streams or a combination? Tell us how you would propose tackling California’s projected budget deficit.
Our services are not 75% better than they were before. Consultants, private contractors, and inefficient bureaucracies have bled our state dry. Special interests have captured programs intended for the public good and now bill us by the hour, not by what they deliver.
Yet rather than empower the public employees and agencies that have proved they can create results, we created a culture that punishes workers for thinking outside of the box under the fear of lawsuits, and underpay our best and brightest, losing them to the very same private consultants we pay exorbitant fees to hire. Pair this with structural constitutional issues that mean in good years we are required to spend $1.50 for every $1 collected in taxes, it’s no wonder that we can never balance a budget.
As a Gen Z leader who has passed legislation in Sacramento, I’ve seen firsthand how our system is fundamentally flawed and needs whole-scale reform. I’m not afraid to say that the status quo isn’t working, and we need to get back to the basics of what it means for the government to follow through on its promises.
To solve our budget crisis, we need to fix our state constitution and retool our bureaucracy to focus on cost control and service delivery, not just endless paperwork. For you, what’s a non-starter when talking about budget cuts? Why? The easiest way to balance a budget is to cut the programs serving people with the least political power. That’s also the fastest way to make a crisis worse. California’s long-term prosperity has always come from investing in people. Our public universities built the middle class.
Our healthcare programs keep communities productive and healthy. Our safety-net programs prevent temporary setbacks from becoming lifelong poverty. When governments cut these investments, the costs don’t disappear. They show up later as homelessness, untreated illness, and lost economic opportunity.
Before we talk about cutting services people rely on, we should first examine whether the state is spending money efficiently, whether programs are achieving measurable results, and whether we are focusing resources on long-term outcomes instead of short-term political wins. If California is going to lead the country in innovation and opportunity, we cannot do it by pulling the ladder up behind us.
What are the top three most pressing issues facing the state, and what would you propose, as a state legislator, to address them? Three issues will define California’s future: housing scarcity, climate resilience, and economic opportunity. California currently builds one home for every four people who graduate from high school.
We simply do not build enough homes. I support building housing of all types, especially social housing models where the state builds permanently affordable homes insulated from speculation. This approach has worked around the world and can work here as well. Wildfires, drought, and extreme weather are already reshaping our communities.
We need to shift from a reactive system to a proactive system. This means expanding insurance discounts for people who harden their homes against wildfire, fixing inter-agency coordination issues in disaster response, and investing in resiliency infrastructure to prevent the next catastrophe. Too many young Californians feel locked out of the future. In Sacramento, I passed legislation making it easier to build affordable student housing so our youth can afford an education.
Now, entry-level jobs are disappearing while corporations reap record profits. We must adapt to a new AI-led reality and acknowledge that many of these jobs will never return. Corporations need to pay what they owe and contribute to the costs of large-scale job loss. With a funded government that delivers, we can provide a basic standard of living for everyone.
California should remain a place where young people come to build their future, not a place they feel forced to leave. What specific policy would you champion in the statehouse to improve the cost of living for residents? Would you see this having an immediate impact on Californians or would it take some time? California doesn’t build affordable housing. It gives money to local non-profits that then build individual projects. At the current rate of building affordable housing, it would take 65 years to meet just the existing need. We need solutions that approach homebuilding at the scale needed to solve it.
Social housing means homes that are publicly built or publicly owned, permanently affordable, and open to a broad range of incomes. Instead of relying solely on private developers to solve a housing shortage, the public sector becomes an active builder again. California needs to create a modular housing developer that can build homes across the state, leveraging economies of scale to deliver at the capacity and cost to solve the problem.
Many of the most affordable cities in the world rely on this model. It removes housing from the speculative market and guarantees long-term affordability. Some impacts would take time because housing construction requires planning and development. Public housing programs can also create immediate relief by stabilizing rents and ensuring that a growing share of homes remain permanently affordable.
There have been numerous efforts made in the state legislature to curtail federal immigration enforcement in California, from prohibitions on agents wearing masks to banning federal officers from future employment in a public agency. Do you see any area where the state could better protect its residents from the federal government’s widespread immigration crackdown? Would you prefer the state work more hand-in-hand with the federal government on immigration?
Where does the role as a state legislator fall into your beliefs here? I was shot between the eyes with a rubber bullet while peacefully protesting against the immigration raids this past summer. It wasn’t ICE that shot me, it was the LAPD.
In violation of a federal injunction for prior abuse of these weapons, our community police force actively defended outside fascist agitators, rather than protecting us from ICE. California should require police to do the exact opposite and work with peaceful protestors, not against them. I am a proud member of my local rapid response network and believe our state has the means to fight against deportations and take care of separated families in this unprecedented time.
Losing a loved one to illegal deportation often means taking away a family’s source of income, and can have devastating financial effects as a result. I will champion fully funding legal defense for non-violent immigrants facing deportation, cash assistance for families who lose a primary caregiver, and creating community notification channels to warn about impending ICE activity. Health care costs — like in many other areas — are continuing to rise.
What policies, specifically, would you support or like to champion that could lower premiums or out-of-pocket expenses? I support CalCare, a bill to create a public option healthcare system in the state of California. Medical executives are raking in record pay while the cost of basic necessities like insulin and EPI-PENS is increasing by 300-500%.
California is leading the way by creating its own insulin for pennies on the dollar, driving down the overall cost through a competitive marketplace where corporate monopolies can no longer exploit people reliant on medication. Our state should lead in generic drug creation for mass consumption, then leverage this capability to create a low-cost healthcare option that will bring down prices for everyone. I also support a sales tax exemption for over-the-counter medication.
Would you support expanding state health care programs to ensure more residents — including those who are not citizens — are covered? How would you propose the state fund such an expansion? Or, how would you propose the people who cannot afford health care still get the necessary care they need without expanding state programs? When large groups of people are excluded from healthcare systems, illnesses go untreated, preventive care disappears, and communities end up relying on emergency rooms as their primary healthcare provider. That is both more expensive and ineffective. California already spends billions every year responding to health crises after they happen. Expanding coverage shifts that spending toward prevention and early treatment, which is almost always less costly in the long run.
Globally, 70 countries with economies smaller than ours provide universal healthcare to all citizens. The question is not if we have the resources to create a public option, but how we will do it. Funding can come from a payroll tax, federal matching funds, negotiated drug pricing savings, and reinvesting money that would otherwise go toward emergency care for uninsured patients. California has historically led the nation in expanding healthcare access.
Programs like Medi-Cal have demonstrated that broader coverage improves health outcomes and economic stability for families. The goal should be simple: when someone gets sick, they can see a doctor before a small problem becomes a life-altering one. As part of combating homelessness, elected officials often talk about the need to prevent people from losing their homes in the first place. What policies or programs should the state adopt to make housing more affordable for renters and homeowners?
What do you propose the state do to incentivize housing development and expedite such projects? The most cost-effective way to end homelessness is to prevent people from becoming homeless in the first place. In LA County, nearly 80% of people experiencing homelessness lived here for 5 years before ending up on the street, and over half cited economic hardship as the reason they became homeless.
During the pandemic, we funded emergency rental assistance vouchers statewide, helping 371,000 households avoid eviction. This gave folks temporary assistance so that an unexpected car problem or medical bill didn’t lead to losing their home. The program was extremely effective in reducing homelessness, but it is now cancelled. I will bring back emergency vouchers statewide, which will pay for themselves by reducing homeless service costs down the line.
We need to make it easier to build in the places it makes sense. The biggest barrier to affordable homes is not zoning; it is the byzantine bureaucracy that makes getting financing and permits for projects as simple as a duplex impossibly complex. We need to make it simpler to build through statewide standardization of building codes, so affordable housing doesn’t cost over $1 million per unit.
Just as we build roads and schools, the state should build housing that guarantees long-term affordability and is insulated from speculation. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law in 2023 authorizing state energy regulators to penalize oil companies making excessive profits. But the California Energy Commission put off imposing the penalties last year after two oil refineries, which represent nearly a fifth of California’s refining capacity, said they would shut down operations.
Those announcements prompted many to be concerned about soaring gas prices. What do you think of the commission’s decision? And how would you, as a state legislator, propose balancing California’s climate goals with protecting consumers from high gas prices at the pump? We need to move away from fossil fuels, but millions of low-income Californians still depend on gasoline to get to work. I don’t believe that the costs of this change should rest disproportionately on the shoulders of those least able to pay. With the war in Iran causing global gas prices to spike, we need to explore temporary gas tax relief for those most in need and truly invest in alternatives to driving so we aren’t dependent on the pump.
Part of tackling high prices is making sure that corporations with near-monopoly power aren’t able to gouge our pockets for their personal gain. In California, we have an unexplained gasoline premium of about 41 cents per gallon, which is exactly what the excessive profits legislation was designed to tackle. It is no surprise that oil companies with a history of deception are threatening that, if they can’t rip us off, they’ll leave the state.
The fact is, our transition away from fossil fuels means these companies know the demand for oil will decrease over time. So, of course, they will blame not being able to make enough profit for refinery closures, rather than the underlying long-term trends. Just so they can squeeze every last penny out of our wallets.
We need to make the polluters pay for the damage they have done to our environment, and help insulate people from the price shocks that will happen with this transition. In 2024, voters approved Proposition 36 to increase penalties for certain drug and retail theft crimes and make available a drug treatment option for some who plead guilty to felony drug possession. Would you, as a legislator, demand that more funding for behavioral health treatments be included in the budget?
How would you ensure that money is used properly? Prisons should not be the front line to our substance abuse and mental health crises. We know that punishment does not solve addiction.
If the state is increasing penalties tied to drug offenses, at a bare minimum, we also have a responsibility to ensure functioning treatment options exist. Otherwise, we are cycling people through the justice system without addressing the root problem. With funding must come with accountability. California has invested billions in behavioral health over the years, yet too often the system remains fragmented and hard to access.
We need clear reporting on outcomes: how many people receive treatment, how long they remain in care, and whether programs are helping people recover. Funding should prioritize programs that deliver measurable results, not just expand bureaucracy. What role should the state play in ensuring hospitals and doctors are providing gender-affirming care to LGBTQ+ residents? Similarly, what role do you believe the state could play should other states adopt policies that restrict that care?
Gender-affirming care is recognized by major medical organizations as necessary healthcare for many transgender people. The state’s role should be to ensure that care remains accessible and protected. California should continue supporting providers who offer gender-affirming care and expand training so more healthcare professionals are able to provide these services.
In an unprecedented era of persecution for the queer community, California has a duty to act as a safe harbor for people across the country. I am proud that we have led on social values of inclusivity for all. But without economic justice, we restrict access to life-saving care only to the richest Americans. We need to protect the LGBTQ+ community in our state and make our communities more affordable so everyone fleeing to safety can be welcome here.
Governments around the world are increasingly considering an age ban or other restrictions on social media use among young people, citing mental health and other concerns. Do you believe it’s the state’s responsibility to regulate social media use? Why or why not? And what specific restrictions or safeguards would you propose as a state lawmaker?
Similar to gambling, alcohol, and other vices, social media is highly addictive beyond many people’s self-control. Social media platforms are among the most powerful communications tools ever created, but they are largely unregulated environments for young people. The state has a role in ensuring companies are not designing platforms that exploit addictive behavior among minors.
California should restrict social media usage for kids under the age of 16, strengthen protections around data collection, require clearer transparency about the mental health ramifications of addictive algorithms, and ensure strong parental control tools are available. It is ensuring that technology companies operate responsibly when their products affect the mental health and safety of young people. Artificial intelligence has become a ubiquitous part of our lives.
Yet public concerns remain that there aren’t enough regulations governing when or how AI should be used, and that the technology would replace jobs and leave too many Californians unemployed. How specifically would you balance such concerns with the desire to foster innovation and have California remain a leader in this space? We are in a transformational moment in history, where for the first time, a revolutionary technology has the capability to replace not just jobs, but ideas. In the home of entertainment, where artist creativity and human imagination have driven storytelling on a global scale, AI’s effect on our state will have massive implications. Artificial intelligence is not going away. As Californians, we have a moral imperative to lead that transition responsibly.
We must balance the fine line of not losing our competitive edge in a global economy, while also ensuring we protect people’s intellectual property and quality of life. In an era of extreme misinformation, we need to ensure that content that is majority-AI-generated has watermarks, so we can tell what is real and what isn’t.
Additionally, the data that AI trains on should be fully licensed, so we can respect the intellectual property rights of the human artists and creatives these models are built on. At the same time, corporations will make record profits from laying off workers, and our social programs will absorb the brunt of the costs of taking care of a new jobless generation. We need to ensure that the profits from this technology don’t just benefit the wealthiest, but everyone.
California has the opportunity to set global standards for responsible AI while remaining the world’s technology leader. Statistically, violent crime rates in California is on the decline, but still, residents are not feeling safe or at ease in their communities. How do you see your role in the state legislature in addressing the underlying issues that make Californians feel unsafe in their own neighborhoods? Crime statistics matter, but people’s sense of safety depends on whether their communities feel stable. The most effective public safety strategies focus on prevention. Housing stability, access to mental health care, and economic opportunity all reduce crime. The state should expand mental health treatment capacity and support community-based violence prevention programs that address problems before they escalate.
Public safety also requires trust. Communities need to believe that the systems meant to protect them are working fairly and effectively. What’s a hidden talent you have? Both my dad and grandfather were professional musicians in LA, and I grew up around the entertainment industry, so music has always been part of my life. Songwriting has become a really great way for me to bond with friends and feel grounded. I think having the privilege of time to do things innately human is one of the most important parts of life.
Everyone should have their basic needs taken care of so they can spend time on the things that bring us joy. Spencer Pratt, Los Angeles mayor candidate, 2026 primary election questionnaireLA County’s juvenile hall ‘depopulation’ is almost complete; is it working? Burbank man gets 10 years in prison for embezzling from elderly victim more than $1.8 millionRiverside’s historic Mission Inn sold to San Manuel Nation
California Budget Deficit June Primary Election Gen Z Leadership Government Reform Bureaucratic Inefficiency
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Candidates Invited for NBC4 and Telemundo 52 California Gubernatorial and Los Angeles Mayoral Debates AnnouncedNBC4/KNBC and Telemundo 52/KVEA announced the candidates who have qualified to participate in their live, one‑hour debates for California’s 2026…
Read more »
Meet the candidates for California lieutenant governor: ‘A job about nothing’CalMatters interviewed five leading candidates who are competing for the notoriously anticlimactic gig of lieutenant governor. Here’s what they said.
Read more »
Can deep-blue California end up with two GOP candidates for governor?The so-called ‘anti-Trump Republic of California’ is looking at a possible Democratic nightmare. How? The top two vote getters in the June primary advance to the November ballot, regardless of party, and the Democratic field has no clear candidate. CNN’s Kyung Lah reports.
Read more »
Can deep-blue California end up with two GOP candidates for governor?The so-called ‘anti-Trump Republic of California’ is looking at a possible Democratic nightmare. How? The top two vote getters in the June primary advance to the November ballot, regardless of party, and the Democratic field has no clear candidate. CNN’s Kyung Lah reports.
Read more »
Meet the candidates for California Attorney GeneralGet to know Rob Bonta, Michael E. Gates and Marjorie Mikels, as we explore their backgrounds, their top priorities, and what is at stake for voters in this election.
Read more »
Here's why your California voter guide is missing some candidates' statementsVoters flipping through California's state voter guide for the June primary may notice something missing: candidate statements for some high-profile races.
Read more »