The Brief

California voters told lawmakers last fall that they wanted doctors to get paid more to see low-income patients. But officials for the Newsom administration blew past a federal deadline to make that happen through Medi-Cal on Monday, effectively leaving millions of dollars unclaimed.

The unclaimed money is tied to Proposition 35, a ballot measure passed by 68% of voters in November. The measure committed money from a special tax on health insurance plans to increase payments to doctors and healthcare facilities that treat low-income patients in Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program.

But first the state had to submit papers to the federal government for approval. That deadline was March 31.

Missing the deadline means that, for the first quarter of the year, doctors will not get the rate increases promised by the ballot measure. It also means that California will lose federal matching dollars intended to boost the Medi-Cal program during that time period.

The Department of Health Care Services, the agency that oversees Medi-Cal and the implementation of Proposition 35 did not respond by publication deadline to questions from CalMatters about why the state missed the deadline.

In recent legislative hearings, Health Care Services Director Michelle Baass stated that California’s federal application was delayed by unfilled appointments on the advisory committee established by the ballot measure to oversee spending.

Enough of those appointments were filled for the committee to legally meet, but there is still one outstanding appointment. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office refused to respond to questions about why the appointment has not been made. The committee is set to meet for the first time April 14.

During a February hearing, another official for the healthcare services department said the agency never believed it would be feasible for the state to meet the March deadline.

The slow implementation is frustrating lawmakers and clinicians alike who say rate hikes are long overdue and necessary to increase access for Medi-Cal recipients.

Assemblymember Dawn Addis, a Democrat from Morro Bay, said in a recent hearing that Prop. 35 was “widely popular” and she had supported it with the hope that rate increases would begin quickly.

Lawmakers have aggressively expanded Medi-Cal benefits and eligibility in the past 10 years. Today, one in three Californians get healthcare through the state program. But doctors say the amount they get paid to see Medi-Cal patients hasn't increased in two decades.

Addis said during the hearing that “94% of Californians now have healthcare coverage, but so many folks can't access providers. And what people in rural areas will point to is that providers just simply cannot afford to practice in rural areas because the reimbursement is so low.”

In a separate legislative hearing, Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson noted that even with the unfilled position, the advisory committee has a quorum and could have met to discuss Proposition 35 implementation.

“This was something the voters were very, very clear about. ... I don’t think the residents would like for us to delay,” said Weber Pierson, a Democrat and obstetrician from San Diego. “It is extremely unfortunate that we will not be able to meet that first deadline and that we are just leaving funds on the table.”

Medi-Cal shortfall as costs increase

The missed deadline comes at a time when California is confronting other Medi-Cal challenges. The state is bracing for potential federal funding cuts that are tied to budget agreements moving through Congress.

And, the state program faces its own shortfall.

Newsom and the Department of Health Care Services are under increased scrutiny for requesting a $6 billion state loan to carry out Medi-Cal operations through the end of the year.

State Republican lawmakers were quick to pin the blame on Newsom’s expansion of Medi-Cal access to all income-eligible immigrants who don’t have permanent legal status.

The administration defended the expansion and pointed to other cost drivers such as increasing pharmacy costs and growing senior enrollment, but acknowledged that about half of the money from the deficit is from the immigrant expansion.

Newsom also blamed the Medi-Cal deficit partially on Proposition 35 in an interview with reporters earlier this month.

“Prop. 35 placed a lot of cost burdens as it relates to rates and so all those things have to be factored in. The voters chose that path with Prop. 35, and we were clear, had strong opinions about it. The cost of [Prop. 35[ would increase the cost of Medicaid, and that’s happening,” Newsom said.

Healthcare industry backed Proposition 35

Before the election, Newsom stopped short of opposing the measure but said Proposition 35’s passage would limit the Legislature’s ability to address future state budget deficits because it committed the money to a specific use.

The measure was backed by nearly the entire healthcare industry, including doctors, hospitals, clinics and ambulance companies. Those groups supported the measure in part because Newsom and past governors had previously reneged on promises to increase Medi-Cal payments and instead used the healthcare tax money to support general government expenses.

The proposition allocates $2 billion annually for 2025 and 2026 to the state general fund while reserving roughly another $2 billion for rate increases and other investments providers want.

Stuart Thompson, a lobbyist for the California Medical Association, which supported the measure, advocated at a March legislative hearing for the Proposition 35 committee to meet as soon as possible. Thompson noted that some payment increases that were approved separately by the Legislature in 2023 have still not been implemented and that the state needs to work to keep the ballot measure on track.

“We really want to get our bang for the buck and make sure that the way that Prop. 35 is implemented really enhances the care for the most needed here in California,” Thompson said.

CalMatters reporter Alexei Koseff contributed to this story.

Supported by the California Health Care Foundation (CHCF), which works to ensure that people have access to the care they need, when they need it, at a price they can afford. Visit www.chcf.org to learn more.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

General Motors agreed to pay $12.75 million in civil penalties for selling driving data of hundreds of thousands of California motorists to data brokers, allegedly without their consent.

The settlement, announced Friday, is the largest ever for violations of the California Consumer Privacy Act, a 2018 law that requires companies to tell consumers about how their data is shared and to respect requests to stop the sharing.

It stemmed from an investigation by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, several county district attorneys, and the California Privacy Protection Agency, which enforces the privacy act. They said General Motors misled drivers who paid for the emergency roadside and navigation service OnStar and made approximately $20 million from the unlawful sale of their data between 2020 and 2024. The information included names, location information, driving behavior, and contact information, Bonta said, which went to the data brokers LexisNexis Risk Solutions and Verisk Analytics.

“This trove of information included precise and personal location data that could identify the everyday habits and movements of Californians,” Bonta said in a press release.

The settlement also requires GM to stop selling data to any consumer reporting agencies for five years and submit privacy assessments to the state, among other provisions. It followed a similar agreement between the Federal Trade Commission and GM earlier this year and California settlements with Honda and Ford over the past 14 months for their own violations of the privacy act.

California’s investigation of GM began after a 2024 New York Times investigation found GM collected data about millions of drivers nationwide and sold it to insurance companies in order to charge the drivers higher premiums. Californians were not impacted by those premium hikes because a state law prohibits insurers from using driving data to set insurance rates, Bonta said.

Bonta told CalMatters at a press conference Friday that it’s unclear if location data collected by General Motors was used by other companies to make predictions about the prices people are willing to pay for goods. That practice is better known as surveillance pricing and can leverage location data. Target paid $5 million to settle a suit from San Diego County’s district attorney over its alleged use of location for the technique. Bonta’s office began an investigation into the surveillance pricing practices of businesses in January.

“I understand that there could be some overlap and maybe we'll discover something in our investigation in surveillance pricing, but that wasn't the focus of this case,” he said.

Los Angeles District Attorney Nathan Hochman said the case started with one person finding location data in a report they requested about the data collected on them. That discovery, he added, led to investigations by journalists, prosecutors, and regulators.

“This case shows more than anything that one consumer can make a huge difference,” he said.

Though the settlement isn’t much compared to the $2.7 billion in net income that General Motors made last year, Hochman called it an indication that companies should expect higher penalties in the future. California reached a privacy law violation settlement with Disney in February for $2.75 million, previously the largest of its kind.

In a statement shared with CalMatters, General Motors spokesperson Charlotte McCoy said, “This agreement addresses Smart Driver, a product we discontinued in 2024, and reinforces steps we’ve taken to strengthen our privacy practices. Vehicle connectivity is central to a modern and safe driving experience, which is why we’re committed to being clear and transparent with our customers about our practices and the choices and control they have over their information.”

Californians will soon have a new protection against companies that use their data without their consent. Starting August 1, the more than 500 data brokers registered with the state must comply with requests California residents can make using an online tool known as the Delete Request and Opt-out Platform, or DROP. The privacy protection agency introduced the tool earlier this year.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

You may surmise that the majority of my knowledge about hockey comes from watching The Mighty Ducks, but apparently that’s all you need to know now that the real-life Anaheim Ducks are progressing through the Stanley Cup playoffs — catch a playoff watch party this week to get up to speed on all the action on the ice.

Licorice Pizza’s music picks include experimental ambient artist Ana Roxanne at Sid The Cat Auditorium and YouTube star-turned-rapper DDG at the Roxy, both on Monday. On Tuesday, Paramore’s Hayley Williams kicks off her solo run at the Wiltern, RAYE plays the first of two nights at the Greek Theatre and indie-pop heroes the New Pornographers play the Teragram. Wednesday, Mika relaxes and takes it easy at the Orpheum; Canadian singer-songwriter Katie Tupper is at the Echoplex; and electronica legends the Prodigy restart their fire with the first of two nights at the Novo.

Thursday, you can see Nottingham post-punks Sleaford Mods at the Fonda; Rozzi at LAX (the club, not the airport); UB40 at the Pacific Amphitheatre; or the triumphant Indigo Girls, who are soldiering on despite singer Emily Saliers’ health issues, at the Bellwether. Lorde will also play the first of her two-night stint at the Forum.

Elsewhere on LAist, you can read about LA’s history of counterculture nuns, get a taste of the birria soup dumpling (“the most LA thing we’ve ever eaten”) and get ready for primary day — June 2 — with our comprehensive Voter Game Plan.

Events

Rakim and Soul Rebels

Monday and Tuesday, May 11 and 12
Blue Note 
6372 Sunset Blvd., Hollywood
COST: FROM $71; MORE INFO

Rakim ahead of the 65th Grammy Awards.

(

Tommaso Boddi

/

Getty Images

)

Jazz Fest in New Orleans is over, but really, who can get enough? Rap and hip-hop pioneer Rakim headlines, supported by the legendary New Orleans brass band the Soul Rebels, for two more unforgettable nights at the Blue Note.

Millennials Are Killing Musicals

Through Sunday, May 17 
Colony Theatre
555 N. Third Street, Burbank
COST: FROM $60; MORE INFO

Last year, I was lucky enough to go to a small read — er, sing — through of a new musical, Millennials Are Killing Musicals. It was clever, witty, tight and very au courant. And so how pleased was I to learn that just over a year later, this little-show-that-could is getting a full staging at the Colony Theatre in Burbank. Nico Juber’s musical follows the daily life of a millennial mom who’s trying to keep up in this emoji-laden world. It’s good fun for anyone who can’t get off their phone, which, let’s admit, is all of us.

AAPI Night Market

Wednesday, May 13, 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.
Sender One LAX
11220 Hindry Ave., Inglewood
COST: FREE; MORE INFO

(

FilipinUp

/

Startr Co.

)

Climbers and wannabe climbers, head to indoor rock climbing gym Sender One for a special AAPI month event with the Asian Climbing Collective and FilipinUp. Celebrate Asian culture and community through climbing, plus local vendors, music, mock competitions and a raffle.

Zahra Tangorra book release

Monday, May 11, 5:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. 
Garibaldina Society 
4533 N. Figueroa Street, Mt. Washington
COST: $10; MORE INFO

Chef and restaurant consultant Zahra Tangorra’s new culinary memoir, Extra Sauce: The Good, The Bad, and The Onions, received a recent rave from The New York Times. She’ll be on hand for a discussion and book signing with the Italian American cultural group, the Garibaldina Society, at their club, moderated by L.A. Times food writer Jenn Harris. Of course, there will be snacks, drinks and sauce.

New exhibits at CAAM

Ongoing 
California African American Museum 
600 State Drive, Exposition Park 
COST: FREE; MORE INFO

(

Jose Lima/Willie Birch

)

The California African American Museum is always a great place to spend an afternoon, but with eight current exhibits now open, you can go again and again this summer and never fail to learn something new (plus, it’s free!). The latest show to open there is Willie Birch: Stories to Tell, which looks at the New Orleans-born artist’s chronicling of Black life in America from the late 1960s through the present, with a focus on “retentions” — African traditions that show up across American culture. The Birch exhibit joins ongoing shows, including Free and Queer: Black Californian Roots of Gay Liberation, and A New Song: Langston Hughes in the West.

Meet the Artist: An Evening with ZiBeZi

Thursday, May 14, 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Yi Cha
5715 N. Figueroa Street, Highland Park
Cost: FREE, MORE INFO

(

Courtesy N|A Consulting

)

Art and food collide at Highland Park modern Korean restaurant Yi Cha for an intimate open house celebrating ZiBeZi, the Korean American artist behind the restaurant's beloved mural (you might also recognize his work from 2020 Oscar winner Parasite). The free-to-enter event includes bites inspired by his work, cocktails and a chance to purchase a tote bag that the artist will sign and illustrate on the spot for a one-of-a-kind keepsake.

Hannah Dasher

Thursday, May 14, 9 p.m.
Desert 5 Spot 
6516 Selma Ave., Hollywood
COST: FREE; MORE INFO 

(

Courtesy Shorefire

)

I’ll admit I knew little about Hannah Dasher before I ended up in an endless scroll of her addictive TikTok feed that blends Southern cooking and country music. She brings her signature honky-tonk sound to a free live performance at Desert 5 Spot, timed with the release of her first cookbook titled — I am not making this up — Stand By Your Pan. Perfect, no notes. Practice your line dancing and find a Waffle House to head to afterward.

Californians can’t cast a ballot until they turn 18, but for the past decade 16- and 17-year-olds have been able to pre-register to vote and be automatically added to the rolls on their 18th birthday.

“Teens get to get a head start on the access to voting,” said Daphné Rottenberg, a 17-year-old Venice High School student who pre-registered last year. “I think that it's a very important thing for younger people to learn about their rights, their voting rights and ultimately their ability to decide what policies and politicians become their leaders.”

Nearly 1.5 million students have pre-registered since the program started in 2016 and more than 1.1 million became eligible voters, according to a spokesperson for the California Secretary of State.

However, LAist reviewed state data and found that participation in the program cratered during the COVID-19 pandemic and has yet to recover. A nonprofit that promotes youth voting found California’s pre-registration totals represent less than 12% of eligible 16- and 17-year-olds.

“California is not doing a good job implementing pre-registration,” said Laura Brill, who lives in Los Angeles and is the founder and CEO of The Civics Center. “It's a very nice law that lets you do it, but it has not been widely adopted by high schools.”

The unrealized promise of the program is to jumpstart the civic lives of young voters, who’ve been historically underrepresented at the polls.

“The process of signing up creates conversations, dialogue that can educate young people and hopefully encourage them [to vote],” said Mindy Romero, director of the Center for Inclusive Democracy at USC. “If they vote at 18, they're much more likely to continue to vote through the life course. But you've got to get them when they're young.”

Do young people vote?

Rottenberg, who describes herself as “pretty involved in the political scene,” didn’t know about pre-registration until she connected with The Civics Project through a teacher to hold a voter registration drive at her school.

Young people vote, but at lower rates than older voters. In the 2024 presidential election, 43% of Californians 18-24 cast a ballot compared to 62% of overall turnout. Romero said this deficit has been consistent over time.

“Every youth vote is valuable and important, but the numbers should be higher,” Romero said. “It's really on our society and we shouldn't be blaming young people for that.”

For example, Romero said campaigns typically don’t prioritize youth outreach and engagement, which feeds into the narrative that candidates don’t represent young people’s interests.

“I think young people really struggle with particularly coming of age in this polarized environment,” Romero said. “They feel really disconnected from the political process. They care about the world and issues, but they don't see necessarily how voting is an actionable step on what they care about.”

Another factor is the decline of civics education at many schools.

“We somewhere along the line disconnected the notion of high schools and K through 12 schools as like, bedrocks of teaching democracy and democratic practice,” said Joel Snyder, a social studies teacher at a charter school in the Florence-Firestone neighborhood. “I think a lot of that nationally is a real fear of folks looking or feeling like they're being partisan.”

Even Snyder, who's been a teacher for more than two decades, paused during our interview to consider whether to share that as part of his class, students register to vote.

When did pre-registration start?

California is one of 19 states that allow teenagers to pre-register to vote at 16 or younger. The majority of states allow people to register if they will be 18 at the time of the election.

California 16-year-olds became eligible for pre-registration in fall 2016.

Then-Santa Barbara Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson cited the state’s low voter registration rates to promote the legislation that lowered the pre-registration age.

“Studies have shown that the earlier people are introduced to voting, the more likely they are to become life-long participants in democracy,” Jackson wrote.

Research shows that pre-registration is associated with higher youth voter turnout.

Here’s how pre-registration works in California:

Eligible 16- and 17-year-olds must be:

• A U.S. Citizen and California resident 
• Not currently serving a state and federal prison term for a felony conviction or found mentally incompetent to vote by a court

Then, eligible teens can register

• Online— this option requires a California-issued driver’s license or identification card number. 
• By mailing or turning in a paper registration form to your county elections office— this option does not require a California-issued driver’s license or identification card number  

In April 2018, then-Secretary of State Alex Padilla said the pre-registration of 100,000 teenagers was a “big milestone.”

The number of pre-registered teens peaked in January 2020 at 163,000 — then fell to a record low, about 113,000, in February 2021.

About 119,000 California 16- and 17-year-olds are pre-registered to vote as of April 3, per the most recent report from the California Secretary of State.

Romero hasn’t analyzed the program’s outcomes, but offered a “likely” set of factors contributing to the stagnating participation.

One is a lack of funding for outreach and education around pre-registration.

“You can't just offer it and then expect a high sign-up rate,” Romero said. “There needs to be conversations around why it's important, what the nuts and bolts of registration are, what the nuts and bolts are of voting so kids feel confident.”

Governor Gavin Newsom has twice vetoed legislation that would have required high schools to help register students to vote.

In the veto letter for AB 2724, a 2024 bill that would have required schools to provide students information about pre-registration before the end of their junior year, Newsom wrote he was concerned about creating another school mandate.

“Schools already have the ability to fulfill the requirements of this bill without creating a new mandate,” Newsom said.

The last two weeks of April and September each year are designated as “high school voter education weeks,” in California, but the responsibility is on individual districts, schools and teachers to follow through.

“Civics in schools is under-taught, right, and under-resourced, and teachers are burdened, they have lots of different competing requirements,” Romero said. “So you have to be really committed to wanna talk to young people about this.”

Brill, with The Civics Center, said there are other changes that could help make it easier for teens to pre-register, including removing the requirement to have a driver’s license to sign up online. About a third of teenagers nationwide have their driver’s license.

Her organization holds trainings and created a toolkit for students and educators to host voter registration drives at their schools. Brill said more than 100 are planned for this spring, including at Venice High School.

“It really bothers me when people think that they're not being heard and so they completely disengage,” said Sage Smith, who is organizing the drive with several other students, including Rottenberg. “Instead of tuning everything out, I, we are able to bring people in so that they actually get involved.”

Smith said more than 300 of her peers pre-registered to vote during last year’s drive, which targeted seniors.

“There's an idea that, you know, younger people are uninvolved, but when they're presented with the information, everyone cared, everyone was quick to sign up,” Smith said.

The 1994 World Cup kicked off with a sold-out match. On a scorching afternoon in Chicago, some 63,000 spectators — including then-President Bill Clinton and Oprah Winfrey — were packed like sardines at Soldier Field to watch Germany vs. Bolivia. Their cheers and boos, as loud as thunder.

Today, it's easy to imagine a World Cup game drawing such American fanfare. But back then, it was a much different story.

"It was a big question as to how the U.S. would embrace it. Would people come to the games?" Mike Sorber, who played for the U.S. Men's National Team in 1994, told NPR.

Ahead of the 1994 World Cup, most Americans were unaware that the U.S. would be hosting the tournament. A survey from the time ranked soccer 67th among the nation's favorite sports (behind tractor pulling).

Despite this, the 1994 World Cup — the first held in the U.S. — took a surprising turn. Game after game, stadiums were filled to capacity, packed not only with tourists and die-hard fans but also with soccer novices who came out of curiosity and because tickets were relatively affordable, according to soccer historians.

Mike Sorber plays during an exhibition game at the Rose Bowl in 1994.

(

Al Bello

/

Getty Images

)

" I think all the naysayers were surprised," said Sorber, who is currently an assistant coach for Major League Soccer's New York Red Bulls. "The atmosphere was electric. It was like a big party."

Soccer's momentum in the U.S. has only been growing since then, fueled by the launch of Major League Soccer and the success of the U.S. Women's National Team. When the World Cup returns to the U.S. in June, it will be greeted by a larger and more passionate fanbase than ever before.

How exactly did a sport that struggled to gain traction for decades go on to break the World Cup's record for largest attendance and win over Americans' hearts? To answer that, NPR spoke to Sorber, along with soccer journalists and fans, about the breakthrough World Cup.

Why did it take so long for the U.S. to embrace soccer?

How far back the soccer tradition in the U.S. goes depends on whom you ask and where they're from.

Chicago, Philadelphia, St. Louis and pockets of New York, New Jersey and New England all have deep soccer roots — often brought by European immigrants in the 19th century, according to Brian D. Bunk, who teaches the history of sports at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

As a result, the sport was largely associated with working-class and immigrant communities, Bunk added. Some also dismissed soccer over the perception that it lacked the physicality of sports like American football.

Colombian soccer fans wave their country's flag during the "Chicago Welcomes the World Cup" parade on June 15, 1994.

(

Eugene Garcia

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

"The argument that was often made against soccer is that it was an inferior form of football," Bunk said.

There were brief bursts of excitement for the sport in the late 20th century — such as when legendary Brazilian player Pelé came to play in the U.S. in the late 1970s — but they never lasted long.

By the 1980s, the future of soccer in the U.S. looked bleak. The North American Soccer League, which began in 1968, folded after the 1984 season. American soccer officials hoped a World Cup tournament at home could resuscitate interest.

" Let's face it: You need to have the product in front of you to see what the heck this is all about," said Michael Lewis, who has covered soccer for five decades. He's the editor of Front Row Soccer, a website that follows the soccer scene in New York and New Jersey.

FIFA also saw an opportunity. Soccer's global governing body viewed the U.S. "as the last and largest uncracked market for its sport," Pete Davies, who has written extensively about sports, told NPR's Fresh Air in 1994.

"And it want[ed] to get into that market," he added.

What led to the tournament's success in 1994? 

What the U.S. lacked in soccer prowess, it made up for with its ability to put on a massive sporting event (thanks to the nation's football stadiums and experience hosting the Olympics) — and a fun one at that.

" We have the sporting infrastructure — the stadiums — we have the hotels, the restaurants, the transportation systems," said Bunk, of the University of Massachusetts. "And so all of that stuff meant that the World Cup could go very smoothly."

Americans also proved they were up for a good time — and World Cup fans knew how to bring the party. Drums, whistles, trumpets, singing, dancing and face paint were the hallmarks of a World Cup game.

A Mexican fan, his face painted with Mexico's national colors, cheers in the stands at the Citrus Bowl stadium in Orlando, Fla., on June 24, 1994, prior to the start of the World Cup match between Mexico and Ireland.

(

Hans Deryk

/

AP

)

A soccer fan supporting Argentina plays a drum at the World Cup match between Argentina and Nigeria at Foxboro Stadium in Massachusetts in June 1994.

(

Richard Sellers

/

Allstar/Getty Images

)

That's what Kevin Tallec Marston, a research fellow at the International Centre for Sports Studies in Switzerland, remembers most vividly from the Belgium vs. Saudi Arabia match in Washington, D.C., which he attended as a teenager.

"It was not the kind of fandom that Americans would associate with going to an NBA game, going to an NFL game," he said. "Seeing these people from all around the world with their own cultures, their own chants, their own songs, their own instruments."

Univision played a major role in attracting both Spanish- and non-Spanish-speaking viewers alike, especially through World Cup announcer Andrés Cantor and his iconic "Goooooooooool!"

"It created this sort of mythical element of what it was to watch the World Cup," said Tallec Marston, who, along with Front Row Soccer's Lewis, is a board member of the Society for American Soccer History.

But perhaps what electrified Americans most was the strong performance of the U.S. Men's National Team. It started with a hard-fought 1-1 tie with Switzerland, followed by a stunning 2-1 upset over powerhouse Colombia. (The victory was later marred by tragedy: Colombian defender Andrés Escobar, who had accidentally knocked the ball into his own team's net, was shot and killed shortly after returning home.)

That match was the first World Cup win for the U.S. men's team since 1950. The team's victory was witnessed by more than 93,000 fans at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena.

Sorber, a midfielder in the starting lineup, said he had played for large crowds before, but never for an audience so enthralled by the U.S. team. It was "euphoria," he said.

" All of a sudden, it really opened the eyes to the whole United States … that wow, this is what the future of soccer could be."

Steve Davis covered the 1994 games as a young sports reporter for The Dallas Morning News. "It sort of lit a fire under people," he said. "I would think some Americans became soccer fans that day."

The U.S. team went on to lose to Romania 1-0 and then to Brazil 1-0. Although the U.S. didn't win, Sorber said, the support and energy from American fans during those matches felt like a victory.

" You had a huge turnout," he said. "So again, that was a big moment in U.S. soccer history … to reestablish soccer, to build that foundation and get more awareness for the U.S. national team."

Post-1994

In total, over 3.5 million people attended the 1994 World Cup — the largest attendance in FIFA history to this day. Despite its success, soccer's American fanbase didn't grow overnight.

"Soccer's growth isn't linear," writer Davis said.

Two years later, the professional Major League Soccer (MLS) launched. Around that time, FIFA's World Cup video game franchise helped introduce soccer to an even broader audience. All the while, the U.S. Women's National Team emerged as a dominating force and accelerated the rise of women's soccer globally. Across the U.S., youth soccer exploded in popularity.

Brandi Chastain celebrates after kicking the winning penalty kick at the 1999 women's World Cup final against China on July 10, 1999.

(

Roberto Schmidt

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

The arrival of international superstars to MLS, like David Beckham in 2007 and Lionel Messi in 2023, added fire to the nation's passion for the sport. MLS, which began with 10 teams, has since expanded to 30 clubs.

Together, these moments helped transform the soccer landscape in the United States. The 2022 World Cup in Qatar drew an average of 4.7 million American viewers per game, according to Nielsen. Each year, millions of Americans watch England's Premier League matches on TV and streaming platforms.

When it comes to America's favorite sports, soccer now ranks third, surpassing baseball, according to Ampere Analysis, a data firm focused on entertainment industries.

Davis, who is now the director of legacy programs for the North Texas FIFA World Cup Organizing Committee, said it's validating to see the sport he has loved and played since childhood resonate with more people at home.

"I did have some faith that it was going to grow," he said. "But I would be lying if I said I thought we'd be here in 2026, seeing how big it's become."

The challenges ahead 

Although this isn't the first time that the U.S. has hosted the World Cup, the upcoming tournament is expected to be vastly different.

"One of the key aspects of the '94 World Cup was taking football to the new horizon," said Tallec Marston, who co-wrote Inventing the Boston Game. "So it'll be interesting because we are no longer in a new frontier."

Hosted by the U.S., Canada and Mexico, this year's competition will introduce more teams and matches than ever before. It will also return to a far more diverse United States. In 1994, about 8% of the country's population was foreign-born. As of 2025, immigrants make up 15% of the nation.

Two men walk past a mural of a soccer player in Guadalajara, Mexico, on April 29. Mexico will co-host the biggest World Cup in history, along with the United States and Canada, from June 11 to July 19.

(

Ulises Ruiz

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

"You're going to have a representation of countries and nations that we will have never seen before. And so that will be very exciting to see," Tallec Marston said.

The current U.S. Men's National Team has far more experience on the World Cup stage compared with the 1994 team. Since then, the team has qualified for every World Cup except one, in 2018. There's much excitement for this group of young players, many of whom are playing for top European clubs.

The controversies leading up to the games are also quite different. In 1994, the uncertainty was whether many Americans would attend the matches. This year, the question is whether they will be able to afford to — with dynamic pricing driving ticket costs sky-high.

The tournament will also take place during a politically volatile period in the United States. The ongoing war with Iran has led to questions about whether the Iranian team will participate.

The Trump administration's travel restrictions and harsh immigration crackdown have also sparked debate as to how many tourists will feel comfortable traveling to the United States. The administration is also requiring a bond of up to $15,000 for travelers from 50 countries that it deemed as having immigration risk factors, such as high overstay rates and screening and vetting deficiencies. Five nations that qualified for the World Cup — Algeria, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Tunisia and Cape Verde — are on the list.

For all these reasons, Lewis, who wrote Around the World Cup in 40 Years, about his experience covering eight men's World Cups, expects that "there'll be magic, but there'll be headaches too."

" I think the games themselves should be exciting and fun," he said. However, putting the problems to rest, Lewis added, will be "easier said than done."
Copyright 2026 NPR