The Brief

Seventeen years ago, Californians bet on a grand vision of the future. They narrowly approved a $10 billion bond issue to build a high-speed rail line that would zip between San Francisco and Los Angeles in under three hours. This technological marvel would slash emissions, revitalize the state’s Central Valley, and, with some financial help from the feds and private sector, provide the fast, efficient, and convenient travel Asia and Europe have long enjoyed.

State officials promised to deliver this transit utopia by 2020. Instead, costs have more than doubled, little track has been laid, and service isn’t expected to begin before 2030 — and only between Bakersfield and Merced, two cities far from the line’s ultimate destinations.

It’s little wonder the project finds itself in a precarious financial position, fighting political headwinds, and deemed a boondoggle by everyone from federal Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy to Abundance authors Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson.

“In the time California has spent failing to complete its 500-mile high-speed rail system,” they wrote, “China has built more than 23,000 miles of high-speed rail.”

The reasons for this vary with who’s being asked, but people with expertise often cite three fundamental missteps: creating a new agency to lead the effort, failing to secure adequate funding from the start, and choosing a route through California’s agricultural heartland. The state’s strict environmental review process hasn’t helped, either.

Protestors voice their opposition to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, who in February went to Union Station in L.A. to call California’s high-speed rail efforts a “boondoggle” and “failed experiment.”

(

Allen J. Schaben

/

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

)

Rail's challenges

Such struggles are not unique to the Golden State, where support for the project remains strong. Although the private sector venture Brightline has seen some success, publicly funded high-speed rail efforts in Texas, Ohio, Washington, D.C., and beyond have stalled. Regulatory complexity, a political environment that favors cars and highways, and constant funding challenges stymie America’s aspirations even as other countries have spent big on tens of thousands of miles of track. Gov. Gavin Newsom promises to see the nation’s most ambitious rail project through despite recently losing all federal support, but its troubled path underscores the systemic challenges of building big in America.

California has always been a car-crazy place, and by the early 1990s, transportation studies made clear that its highways would not keep pace with the growth to come.

Policymakers saw an answer in bullet trains.

The Legislature established the California High-Speed Rail Authority in 1996 and gave it the tough job of planning, designing, building, and running the system.

Some consider that a mistake because the agency lacked experience managing so big a project and navigating complex bureaucracy. Even some rail supporters concede it would have been better to let the authority provide oversight and leave the heavy lifting to the state Department of Transportation, or CalTrans.

“It’s building a lot of overpasses and right-of-way, which Caltrans does all the time,” said Ethan Elkind, director of the UC Berkeley climate program in its Center for Law, Energy and the Environment.

Without that experience, the authority’s 10 employees relied heavily on consultants like engineering firm WSP, running up expenses.

“We paid WSP and their predecessor more than $800 million in consulting fees,” said Lou Thompson. He chaired the High Speed Rail Peer Review Group, established in 2008 to provide project oversight, from 2012 until 2024. The authority has in recent years eased its reliance on consultants, who reportedly have gone from 70% of its workforce to 45% over the past seven years.

Funding and politics

Once the High-Speed Rail Authority set up shop, work proceeded in fits and starts. Even as it considered routes and started the myriad bureaucratic tasks the project required, political interest waxed and waned with the state’s fiscal health. Skeptics lamented the cost and questioned whether bullet trains would attract enough riders to be worthwhile. But rail advocates, environmentalists, unions, and others kept pushing forward and in 2008 convinced voters to approve Proposition 1A, securing $10 billion to finance construction.

It was never going to be enough — at the time, the cost was pegged at $45 billion, a figure that did not account for inflation — and funding has been a challenge from the start.

Still, the Obama administration saw an opportunity to show that the economy was bouncing back from the Great Recession. The federal American Reinvestment Recovery Act provided $3.5 billion to help get things started. The authority, which had already mapped a route through the Central Valley, soon began grading land, moving utilities, and taking other steps toward construction of the first leg, a 119-mile stretch from Bakersfield to Madera.

Things chugged along until 2013, when a state judge blocked the use of Prop 1A funds, ruling that some of the work did not meet the rules for bond expenditures.

With federal support contingent upon the state’s cash, the federal grants had to be renegotiated — before they expired in 2017.

“We were literally sitting there saying, ‘Well, if we don’t start going, we could lose $700 [million] or $800 million of the federal money,” said Dan Richard, who was the High-Speed Rail Authority’s board chair from 2011 until 2019.

That prompted the agency to do something no one wanted to do: Move forward without having acquired all of the necessary land. So it did.

Then President Donald Trump took office. He seemed interested in what California was attempting to build, having lamented that China and Japan “have fast trains all over the place” while the U.S. relies upon “obsolete technology.” His opinion soured when Gavin Newsom became governor in 2019 and the two sparred over the president’s policies. Trump later canceled nearly $1 billion in federal funds for the rail project.

The Biden administration restored it and provided another $3.1 billion from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The infusion was to help build a station in Fresno and acquire trains for testing. Even with the windfall, California remained at least $7 billion short of what it needed for the first short run through the Central Valley. The situation grew worse in July when Trump rescinded the entire amount after the Federal Railroad Administration said it saw no way of covering that shortfall and no path to completion by 2033.

Newsom said the move “reeks of politics," and the state is suing. But the impact goes beyond California by establishing a precedent to cancel projects at will.

“How do you go to your voters and say, ‘Put up the money. We expect 50% federal share,’ without knowing that the next administration could turn around and say, ‘I don’t like that project,’” Richard said.

The High-Speed Rail Authority initially planned to rely upon state, federal, and private sector funding in equal measure, but California has provided 75% of the $14.6 billion spent so far. The authority wrote in a letter to the Railroad Administration that Newsom’s plan to allocate $1 billion, pulled from the state’s cap-and-trade program, toward the project each year for 20 years will be enough to finish the Central Valley segment. The governor also recently signed a bill requiring the authority to update its estimate on the funding gap for that leg of the journey.

With California seemingly on its own, Thompson said the project needs an income stream approaching $5 billion a year to build everything. That is one reason the authority in June asked the private sector and financial institutions to weigh in on the chance of public-private partnerships. Its chief executive, Ian Choudri, said private investors have shown “extreme interest.”

Thompson isn’t buying it.

“My opinion is that that is hot air,” he said. The way he sees it, no one’s going to invest until they can see that there is demand for the rail line.

Politics and permitting

One of the reasons Brightline is held up as an example of how to bring high-speed rail to the United States is its strategy includes building on public land. Part of its 235-mile line between Miami and Orlando stands on land owned by Florida East Coast Railway. The company’s planned run between Las Vegas and L.A. will largely follow Interstate 15.

California could have done the same and built along the 5 Freeway, which bisects the Central Valley, but chose to go through major population centers 20 to 50 miles to the east. That pivotal decision increased the project’s cost and complexity. Following the freeway would have been straighter and flatter, without the elevated track, tunnels, and other infrastructure needed to traverse cities. The route also turned a state effort into a regional development project beset by local politics.

The High-Speed Rail Authority had good intentions, however. It hopes that bringing rail to places like Merced and Bakersfield might entice Silicon Valley and Los Angeles firms to open offices in the Central Valley, which would be a 90-minute ride from their headquarters. It also would boost local economies left behind by the state’s boom — and it has, to some extent. The project has added 11,000 construction jobs to the region. But that exacted its own toll.

“Those economic benefits have been really substantial, so that sort of worked, but it came at potentially the cost of not being able to build the system at all, because by starting it in the Central Valley they’ve basically blown all the money there,” said Elkind of the UC Berkeley Climate Program.

Should the state once again ask voters for money, it would have had a stronger case if initial construction had occurred in major population centers, he said.

The route also created additional hurdles as the project navigated California’s environmental oversight rules. Going through several cities and all that farmland increased the number of stakeholders who had to be consulted, ballooning the environmental review process.

To be fair, the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, has long protected the state’s rich biodiversity. But some rail proponents argue it has been used to stymie progress. High-Speed Rail Authority data shows it has spent more than $765 million on environmental review. Lawsuits stemming from CEQA can be particularly expensive.

“If you have a $100 billion project, and let’s say that interest rates are 3% a year, every year’s delay costs you $3 billion,” Thompson said. “A $50,000 lawsuit can delay you for a year, and so there’s an enormous pressure on you to try to bargain your way out of these kinds of situations.”

California recently loosened CEQA requirements for the rail system’s maintenance facilities and stations, a move Newsom cheered.

“These are very targeted exemptions that will help cut red tape and deliver on California’s vision of high-speed rail without compromising environmental protections,” gubernatorial spokesperson Daniel Villaseñor wrote in an email.

Whether that reform has an impact remains to be seen, because most of the environmental review is already completed.

And regulation was never the project’s biggest problem.

“It just seems like the easy, obvious answer,” said Hana Creger, associate director of climate equity at the Greenlining Institute. “But I think these things are a lot more complex.”

Progress on high-speed rail

Given all of this, it can be easy to lose sight of what progress has been made. The authority is quick to note that 463 miles of the 494-mile system has cleared the environmental review process and is “construction ready.” It also boasts of having laid 70 miles of guideway — meaning track, elevated structures, or other riding surface — and erected 57 structures. All told, the project has created more than 15,500 jobs since its inception.

Despite the challenges, Newsom remains steadfast in his determination to see Californians one day riding the trains they were promised so many years ago. “I want to get it done,” he said in May. “That’s our commitment.”

That will surely resonate with his constituents; recent polling shows 62% of voters believe the state should continue financing the project, though opinions split sharply along partisan lines. Still, experts caution that support isn’t enough. Tangible progress and credible funding streams are essential to maintain momentum.

The High-Speed Rail Authority seems to understand this and is pressing ahead to connect Bakersfield to either Merced or Gilroy.

There’s a lot to do before crews start laying track, but the goal is to finish that run by 2032 and the authority recently opened the bidding process to begin installing track next year.

Looking further ahead, its latest plan, released late last month, calls for extending the line south to Palmdale by 2038, putting it within 80 miles of San Francisco and 40 miles of L.A. at a cost of $87 billion.

“While challenges remain, so too does the potential to deliver a modern transportation system worthy of the state’s ambitions — one that reflects the scale, complexity and promise of California itself,” Choudri wrote in the plan. “Let’s go build it.”

Assuming the project retains its $4 billion federal grants, the project has $29 billion available, with an additional $15 billion from Newsom’s proposal, according to the CHSRA. Thompson said the governor’s proposal, which would set aside $1 billion every year for the project, should keep it alive for the next four years.

Beyond that, it will need an infusion of cash, likely from voters but possibly from a future presidential administration.

“I think the path forward is that they could show some first segment success and then go back to the voters,” Elkind said. “You just got to get through this first era here, and get something built that they can show to the voters.”

Ultimately, California’s high-speed rail is more than a train line; it is a test of the nation’s ability to deliver transformative infrastructure. Its path forward remains uncertain, but every mile of track laid could lead to a turning point — not just for the state, but for the broader goal of building the kind of transportation network other countries take for granted.

As the clock strikes midnight across time zones, people gather to celebrate the new year.

We take a look at the shared joy and traditions in these photos.
Copyright 2026 NPR

Reveler use their smartphones to film the falling balloons and confetti as they celebrate the start of 2026 during the New Year countdown event held at a shopping mall in Beijing, early Thursday, Jan. 1, 2026.

(

Andy Wong

/

AP

)

Revellers watch a fireworks and light show for children on Museumplein as part of New Year's Eve celebrations in Amsterdam on December 31, 2025.

(

Remko de Waal

/

Getty Images

)

Members of the public gather to celebrate the New Year during the annual bell-tolling ceremony at the Bosingak Pavilion on January 01, 2026 in Seoul, South Korea.

(

Chung Sung-Jun

/

Getty Images

)

Fireworks explode over skyscrapers during New Year celebrations on January 01, 2026 in Makati, Metro Manila, Philippines.

(

Ezra Acayan

/

Getty Images

)

People buy batons that read happy New Year 2026 on December 31, 2025 in Bangkok, Thailand. Thousands lined the Chao Phraya river in Bangkok as the country welcomed the new year.

(

Lauren DeCicca

/

Getty Images

)

Fireworks explode from the Taipei 101 building during the New Year's celebrations in Taipei, Taiwan, Thursday, Jan. 1, 2026.

(

Chiang Ying-Ying

/

AP

)

Revellers watch the New Year's Eve fireworks from the The Huc Bridge at Hoan Kiem Lake in Hanoi on Jan. 1, 2026.

(

Nhac Nguyen

/

Getty Images

)

People attend the New Year countdown event to celebrate the start of 2026 in the Central district of Hong Kong, on Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2025.

(

Chan Long Hei

/

AP

)

Fireworks explode around the Burj Khalifa, the world's tallest building, during New Year's Eve celebrations in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Thursday, Jan. 1, 2026.

(

Fatima Shbair

/

AP

)

People pose for pictures near illuminated decorations on New Year's Eve in Mumbai, India, Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2025.

(

Rafiq Maqbool

/

AP

)

Revellers watch fireworks during the New Year celebrations in Karachi on January 1, 2026.

(

Rizwan Tabassum

/

Getty Images

)

Iraqis gather in Baghdad's Al-Zawraa Park during New Year's Eve celebrations on December 31, 2025.

(

Ahmad Al-Rubaye

/

AFP/Getty Images

)

Onlookers stand beside light ornaments on New Year's Eve at Bakrkoy Square in Istanbul on Dec. 31, 2025.

(

Yasin Akgul

/

Getty Images

)

People strike a giant bell to celebrate the New Year at the Zojoji Buddhist temple, minutes after midnight Thursday Jan. 1, 2026, in Tokyo.

(

Eugene Hoshiko

/

AP

)

A couple takes a selfie as the last sunset of 2025 is seen over the Mediterranean Sea in Beirut, Lebanon, Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2025.

(

Hassan Ammar

/

AP

)

People watch and take photos as the Ferris wheel displays "Happy New Year" in 16 different languages at Pacific Park on Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2025 in Santa Monica.

(

Juliana Yamada

/

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

)

Millions of Americans are facing higher health care premiums in the new year after Congress allowed Affordable Care Act subsidies to expire. But earlier this week, a bipartisan group of senators worked to strike a compromise that could resurrect the enhanced ACA premium tax credits — potentially blunting the blow of rising monthly payments for Obamacare enrollees.

"There's a number of Republican and Democratic senators who are seeing what a disaster this will be for families that they represent," Sen. Peter Welch, D-Vt., said on Morning Edition Thursday. "That's the common ground here, and it's a doable thing."

Welch said he joined a bipartisan call Tuesday — first reported by Punchbowl News — in which a handful of senators charted out a possible health care compromise.

"We could extend the credits for a couple of years, we could reform it," Welch said of the call. "You could put an income cap, you could have a copay, you could have penalties on insurers who commit fraud. You actually could introduce some cost saving reductions that have bipartisan support."

But according to Welch, this legislation is only doable with President Trump's blessing.

"It would require that President Trump play a major role in this, because he has such influence over the Republican majority in the House and even in the Senate," Welch said.

Last fall, Republicans and Democrats fought bitterly over the Obamacare subsidy extension, causing a political standoff that led to the longest government shutdown in U.S. history. Meanwhile, Trump has remained relatively hands-off, withholding his support for any health care legislation.

Despite these obstacles, Welch said he believes the jump in prices that people across the country now face will break the logjam in Congress.

"A farmer in Vermont, their premium is going to go from $900 a month to $3,200, a month," Welch said. "So they're going to really face sticker shock. There's going to be a secondary impact, because the hospitals, particularly in rural areas, are going to lose revenue."

But even if the Senate advanced a compromise bill on the ACA, the House would also have to get behind it. And the lower chamber has its own bipartisan effort on an ACA subsidy extension.

Just before the recess began in mid-December, four House Republicans joined Democrats in signing a discharge petition on a three-year extension of the ACA subsidies — forcing a floor vote on the bill when the House returns.

Hours after bucking House Speaker Mike Johnson and joining Democrats, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., told Morning Edition back in December that he thinks this vote will get even more Republican support.

"I don't like the clean extension without any income cap," Fitzpatrick said. "But given the choice between a clean three-year extension and letting them expire, that's not a hard choice for me. And I suspect many of my other colleagues are going to view it the same way."

Fitzpatrick and Rep. Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., have held meetings with moderate senators on legislative paths to extend the ACA subsidies, a source familiar with the talks but not authorized to speak publicly tells NPR.

The Senate returns on Jan. 5 and the House comes back to Capitol Hill on Jan. 6.

Copyright 2026 NPR

California is once again taking steps to limit the influx of dogs from out-of-state puppy mills with a package of laws that take effect in the new year.

AB 519, authored by Assemblymember Marc Berman, D-Menlo Park, prohibits both in-person and online pet brokers from selling dogs, cats or rabbits under a year old.

“The goal is that this will … funnel Californians into the legitimate avenues for either purchasing or rescuing an animal, and it’ll make it harder for bad people to do bad things,” Berman said.

The bill defines a broker as a person or business that sells, processes or transports a pet bred by someone else for profit. It carves out exceptions for shelters, rescues and educational nonprofits teaching kids to care for animals. Service animals and those involved with government agencies, like police dogs, are also exempt.

In addition to the pet broker ban, the “Stop The Puppy Mill Pipeline” legislative package includes two other bills that aim to protect consumers from deceptive third-party pet sellers. The laws are part of a slate of statewide animal protections that will go into effect on Jan. 1, including a ban on declawing cats.

AB 506 by Assemblymember Steve Bennett, D-Ventura, voids any pet contracts that include a nonrefundable deposit or fail to disclose the pet’s medical information and breeder origin. If a contract is voided, the purchaser is entitled to a refund and is not required to return the pet.

SB 312 by state Sen. Tom Umberg, D-Santa Ana, requires dog importers to send health certificates to the buyer and the California Department of Food and Agriculture at least 10 days before the dog enters the state. The CDFA must keep these records for five years and make them publicly available.

Lawmakers introduced these bills to close loopholes that emerged after California’s initial effort to shut down the puppy mill pipeline.

In 2019, California led the nation in banning pet stores from selling dogs from commercial breeders, also called puppy mills, which prioritize profits over animals’ welfare. But the law did not cover online marketplaces, and resellers cropped up to take the place of pet stores, as revealed by a 2024 Los Angeles Times investigation.

The report detailed truckloads of designer dogs, many of them abused and neglected, shipped into the state from commercial breeders in the Midwest. Consumers were advertised puppies from small, local breeders on online marketplaces and unwittingly ended up with sick puppies requiring expensive veterinary care. In one case, a puppy died within weeks.

Brittany Benesi, the senior legislative director for the Western division of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, said these online marketplaces hide the origin and condition of animals even more than brick-and-mortar pet stores do.

“You can go to these websites and they will tell you the astrological sign of a puppy, but you could not find out who that puppy was bred by,” Benesi said.

She argues that the 2019 bill effectively shut off one valve of the puppy mill pipeline, but the online market took advantage of that absence. The ASPCA, which co-sponsored the legislative package, expects these new laws to shut off the online valve as well.

“I think California is such a large, powerful market that these retailers are going to have a really hard time making up for the loss,” Benesi said. “And it may force their hand to change their business models or their business practices in order to regain the California market.”

Opponents of AB 519 argue the law will have a similar unintended consequence as the 2019 retail ban, which they see as having worsened the underground market for puppies.

“You’re once again removing the ability for Californians to access well-regulated, well-run and folks that have oversight, both in the animal welfare and consumer protection areas,” said Alyssa Miller-Hurley, the vice president for government affairs for the Pet Advocacy Network, a national trade association representing breeders, retailers and distributors. “And it’s just going to exacerbate a problem that, unfortunately, already exists.”

By preventing USDA-licensed pet brokers from selling puppies under a year old, Miller-Hurley said this law will push consumers “into the shadows” and force them to work with unregulated online markets like Craigslist, Facebook Marketplace and even TikTok.

“How do you enforce something … over some random person selling an animal on TikTok Live?” Miller-Hurley said.

Animal welfare groups have long been critical of the standards for licensed dog dealers. In 2024, USDA investigations at commercial breeding operations found more than 800 direct violations, according to an ASPCA report. Only two dealers lost their licenses and not a single dog was removed from the facility.

“The federal laws around animal welfare are very, very low bars to meet,” Benesi said. “The USDA licensure allows for dogs to be kept in wire cages with only six inches of space on any side of them for their entire lives, breeding out litter after litter after litter.”

California Attorney General Rob Bonta supported all three bills, and Benesi said the office has made it clear they are committed to enforcing them. She said groups like the ASPCA, as well as the public, will help monitor and file complaints to the attorney general’s office.

Although they oppose the broker ban, the Pet Advocacy Network supports stronger regulations on the puppy trade, like Umberg’s bill, streamlining pet medical information to a single department.

Previously, California required importers to send certificates of veterinary inspection to individual counties. However, many counties were unaware they were supposed to receive them, and many importers would send them to the CDFA, which deleted the files.

“We’re happy to see California join what most of the states already do, which is allow the state department of agriculture or department health to have oversight of these critical pieces of information,” Miller-Hurley said.

This holiday season, as Californians welcome new furry family members to their homes, Benesi encourages people to consider adopting through a rescue or shelter.

For those working with a breeder, she urges prospective pet owners to see where the puppy was raised, meet its parents in person and vet the breeder as carefully as the breeder should be vetting them.

The 40-foot-long parade float dwarfed volunteer Darlene Leyba as she attached flowers to bald spots of exposed wire mesh. As per Rose Parade rules, every inch of the float must be decorated with only natural, organic materials.

Blue waves sweep up into the tailfeathers of the design's symbolic centerpiece:

"A phoenix, rising," the 76-year-old described, looking up at the representation of the mythical bird born from ashes. "And that's how we all feel, that we're going to rise above this and rebuild and bring back our communities."

Nearly a year ago, the Eaton Fire tore through whole neighborhoods including Leyba's, leaving behind an ashy forest of chimneys not far from the parade route, just one week after the 2025 New Year's Day celebration. The grandstand was still up, covered in windblown debris as Leyba's home burned down.

"I told the kids, pack an overnight bag, we'll be back tomorrow," she remembered. "We never came back, and we never said goodbye to our home."

But she's finding her community again through work on the float, which is decorated entirely by fire survivors.

The Rose Parade is a New Year's Day tradition for millions of viewers who tune in on TV to see the creative displays of Southern California's natural bounty roll through the streets of Pasadena. For locals, it has long been a point of pride to be included among the many float crews, marching bands, and equestrian performers that have participated in the event since the first Tournament of Roses in 1890.

Darlene Leyba plans to rebuild her home, which burned in the Eaton Fire. "Altadena's home," she says. "We want to be back." In the meantime, she is honored to represent her community by working on the float.

(

Kirk Siegler

/

NPR

)

"I'm going, my God, I'm representing Altadena, all these people who have lost their homes and live in the community," marveled Leyba. "So, it's an honor."

"It's really kind of a living memorial of beautiful flowers and organic material, in a very LA experience that the world is watching," said Miguel Santana, CEO of California Community Foundation, a charity organization that funds wildfire recovery and sponsored the float.

Santana said many survivors are having a tough time as the anniversary of the fires approaches.

"People are really starting to feel a real mental breakdown," he said. "Folks are really struggling to navigate an insurance system that is failing them. For many people, the fact that the federal government hasn't provided the relief that it has for other natural disasters around the country, they're struggling."

In addition to reminding the nation of the ongoing need for assistance, Santana hoped the float would be a healing way to bring survivors together and create something beautiful to mark the moment.

"One person shared today that this is the first event that he's attended following the fires," Santana recalled. "He had lost his sister and was reluctant to go to anything, but because the Rose Parade is such a part of his own life being from Altadena, it felt right."

That survivor decorated one of 31 sunflowers; each represents someone who died in the fires. During construction in the float barn, the honor of installing the sunflowers was reserved for surviving friends and family, many of whom shared stories of their loved ones as they worked.

Each sunflower represents one of the 31 people who died in the Palisades and Eaton fires.

(

Kirk Siegler

/

NPR

)

"We're hoping that, even for just one day, when they see that float going down a street that they're all familiar with, that they know that the world does care about them, that they're not alone in their journey of grief," says Santana.

"At first, it was very taxing to be around people," said Myra Berg, a survivor of the Palisades Fire. "But when I look around me and see other people who have lost their homes or who have smoke damage, I want to help."

Berg said she liked being up high in the scaffolds, working on the phoenix.

"I enjoyed the hell out of it!"

Like many of the volunteers, it's not the only construction project she's got going on right now — she hopes to have her Malibu home rebuilt around this time next year — but the speed at which the float has come together is gratifying compared to the slow pace of permitting and rebuilding a house.

"Another reporter asked if working on the float has been therapeutic. And I thought, 'Oh, therapeutic! I'm moving forward at this point," Berg jokes.

"I think it's good for the world to know that there is something that honors the survivors and the victims. People forget that these things happen. It's a nice way to reach out and say, 'Yes, we're ok. Thank you.'"

Copyright 2026 NPR