The Brief

The bi-weekly podcast by actor and comedian Marc Maron ended with presidential flair — capping a more than 15-year run that reached millions of listeners.

Episode 1,686 of WTF with Marc Maron dropped on Monday featuring former President Barack Obama as the final guest.

At the start of the episode, Maron explained that he wanted to speak with someone who can help not only reflect on the podcast's legacy, but how he and his listeners should navigate the world. He also wanted insight from the former president on the current state of politics moving forward.

"And how do we do it with some grace and perhaps some hope and some focus," Maron said, asking how to engage in civil discourse.

Obama first appeared on WTF back in 2015, recording from inside Maron's garage. For the second conversation, Maron said it was only fair that this time he host the show from Obama's house in Washington, D.C.

During their hour-long talk, the two spoke about President Trump's second administration, the impact of social media and the need to treat others with decency and respect.

Maron launched WTF with producer Brendan McDonald in September 2009 when podcasting started to gain traction. Over the years, it became the go-to spot for in-depth conversations with actors, directors, writers and most notably, other comedians. Some entertainers who appeared on the podcast include Robin Williams, Louis C.K. and Lorne Michaels.

WTF won several awards throughout the years, including Best Comedy Podcast in 2016 by the Academy of Podcasters.

In July, Maron told NPR's Fresh Air that ending the podcast was a difficult decision, but that he and McDonald had reached a point where they were proud of what they created and were feeling burnt out.

"I just don't think there's any shame in stopping if moving forward would compromise either my or Brendan's vision of the thing or our ability to do it," he said on Fresh Air. "We've maintained our audience all these years, and a lot of them are very close to me. And oddly, the decision made sense to a lot of them."

Part of Maron's charm on WTF was his vulnerability. He openly discussed his struggles with anxiety, loss and past addiction to drugs and alcohol. During the last episode of WTF, Maron told Obama that he was ready for the break but he also felt some nervousness about what comes next.

"There is sort of a fear there, of what do I do now?" he said.

"There is a feeling of like, how am I going to feel less alone? How am I going to deal with my mental this or that? And how am I going to find, you know, a way to exist in the world that we're living in?" Maron added.

The former president responded by sharing how he adjusted to life after leaving the White House.

"Don't rush into what the next thing is. Take a beat and take some satisfaction," Obama said. "Pat yourself on the back for a second."
Copyright 2025 NPR

The acclaimed Max series The Pitt returns for a second season today.

The Pitt centers around Dr. Michael Robinavitch (aka “Dr. Robby”) played by Noah Wyle — probably best known for his 13 season run as a doctor on another medical drama, ER — and a large cast of other doctors, nurses, patients and hospital staff.

The series has a unique format: a season spans just one day, with each episode representing an hour in the emergency room of a fictional Pittsburgh hospital. It’s been lauded for its authenticity (including by medical professionals) and also for its casting, which the show’s Emmy-winning casting directors see as connected.

Cathy Sandrich Gelfond and Erica Berger, who took home an Emmy for their work casting The Pitt’s debut season, say their main directive from the show’s producers was showing the truth of working in an emergency department.

‘If they’ve got the goods, they’ve got the goods’

“ I think the great gift of this show for both of us is that everybody [from the] top down agreed — We didn't need ‘names.’ We had Noah. And that we could just go discover,” Gelfond says. “Best person wins and [it] doesn't matter if they've never done anything. If they've got the goods, they've got the goods. Cause everybody has to have a first job.”

Gelfond and Berger cast a wide net, and got three to five thousand submissions for each character. They narrowed that down to 20 to 40 candidates to read for the role (and more for series regulars), and then submitted five to eight of their favorites to the producers.

Gelfond says considering and casting a lot of newcomers also contributed to the show’s authentic feel. “Part of why this worked is a lot of these people [Erica and I] didn't know either, so they fell into the parts. You have no baggage and you have no expectations, and then they just suddenly become the character.”

‘There can’t be two of us’

The directive for realness also led to a diverse cast, including a Filipino doctor and nurses who sometimes speak Tagalog, and multiple South Asian doctors.

“At the end of the day, what we're trying to do is show the truth of who works in these hospitals,” casting director Gelfond says. “And guess what? There are more than two South Asians.”

But it was something that Gelfond says surprised even the South Asian actresses cast on the show. Similar to what Brooklyn Nine-Nine actresses Stefanie Beatriz and Melissa Fumero described experiencing back in 2019, The Pitt actresses Supriya Ganesh (who plays med student Victoria Javadi) and Shabana Azeez (who plays Doctor Samira Mohan) told the casting directors they thought, “There can’t be two of us.”

‘The climate hasn’t changed what we’re up to’

Their assumption, rooted in their experiences auditioning for other roles, is also reflected in the data on casting in Hollywood. The most recent Hollywood Diversity Report from UCLA that focuses on streaming shows from 2024 found that among the most watched streaming comedies and dramas that year, 79.6 percent of lead actors were white.

And while BIPOC actors “fared much better as co-leads than they did as leads,” they were still underrepresented as co-leads, filling only 29.7 percent of the roles in that year’s top streaming comedies and dramas.

That’s despite continued evidence that shows with diverse casts get good ratings, and that rolling back representation gains comes with substantial financial risks.

In a moment where networks and streamers are pulling back on pledges to diversity, equity and inclusion, Gelfond and Berger say they haven’t seen that have an impact on their work.

 “We're fortunate that we can be open on a lot of parts [...] the role goes to the person who gave the best performance, kind of regardless of anything else,” Berger says. “The climate hasn't changed what we're up to over here.”

If you need a new refrigerator, you go to a hardware store. But what if you need a thousand refrigerators?

This is a math problem in the era of urban mega-fires. A year after L.A. went up in flames, survivors are looking to rebuild quickly and affordably.

As just one person, the costs of rebuilding add up fast. But by pooling their purchasing power, neighborhoods — or what's left of them — are working together to curtail rebuilding costs.

It turns out needing a thousand fridges could be a good issue to have. In Altadena, fire survivors are working together to buy things in bulk. And they're trying to find the most efficient and fair way to do it.

" When you see that deal on the shelf: 'Buy four, get the fifth for 20% off,' all you have to do is consult your wallet," said Michael Tuccillo, whose home was damaged in the Eaton Fire. "But when you're bulk purchasing, it becomes complicated because you have to make a choice that's right for the entire community."

Morgan Whirledge first tried the group approach when he needed a land survey of his property. He's an Eaton Fire block captain, meaning he coordinates with neighbors and other block captains on all types of issues related to fire recovery.

" If you're bringing out survey equipment to an area … why not knock out a few properties at the same time in one day, as opposed to coming out over and over again?" Whirledge said.

A lot of other neighborhoods had the same idea.

This process allowed block captains like Whirledge to try out their negotiating skills — and understand the limits of their leverage. He made a deal for a handful of plots, including his own.

"The surveyor we ended up with was saying, 'Hey, there's kind of a threshold where it stops being more economical for me,'" Whirledge said.

It also revealed the challenges of making big financial decisions with other homeowners. Tuccillo scored a great deal for himself and two dozen neighbors: around $1,700 a lot for a land surveyor, compared to a one-off price of $5,000. But someone had to go first, and someone had to go last.

" It took like two months, maybe three months for some of these people to get service, which is a big deal," said Tuccillo, who is also a block captain. "And people were upset at me."

A house under construction in Altadena in June.

(

Myung J. Chun

/

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

)

'The gap'

Land surveying is simple compared to the decisions that lie ahead for most people rebuilding in Altadena and the Palisades.

Many face an issue that some fire survivors refer to simply as "the gap" — the financial hole between what insurance will give and what it will actually cost to rebuild.

Working together could be the difference that allows some people to return home.

Elizabeth Campbell has been thinking a lot about this problem. She negotiates bulk purchases for a living, and has worked as a buyer for companies like Saks Fifth Avenue and the North Face. When she lost her home in the Eaton Fire, she found a new arena for her expertise.

"Asking a vendor for a discount is not always the best way to get the best price," she said. "When you're purchasing a large amount of goods, you're thinking a little bit more broadly. Where are they manufacturing? Is it something that they need to manufacture six months in advance?"

In the first year of recovery, a lot of these logistical questions were playing out on Discord and in WhatsApp groups. Seeking a bigger fix, some fire survivors have teamed up with David Lee, a software developer.

Lee launched Buildnotes — an online platform to help more people do group purchasing with less logistical and interpersonal hassle. The site is a wholesale marketplace for materials and services needed for rebuilding. Right now, a big goal is to get homeowners and vendors to sign up.

" We try to line up homeowners and projects along three primary dimensions. One is geography. Two is chronology. What's the start date of your project and do the phases of your project line up with other homes? And then third is style of home," Lee said.

Some homeowners in Altadena scored great deals with other neighbors to pay for things such as a land surveyor. The cost went from $5,000 for a one-off price for one property to $1,700 for two dozen neighbors each.

(

Libby Rainey

/

LAist

)

The biggest group purchase: a home

The largest group purchase fire survivors can make is the home itself.

That's the route Brad Sherwood took after losing his house in Santa Rosa to the Tubbs Fire in 2017. He quickly realized that his insurance payout wasn't enough for him and his wife to rebuild a custom home, and they started talking with neighbors about rebuilding together.

In the end, Sherwood and around 20 other families in his neighborhood went in on the same builder: Stonefield Development of Orange County.

"They allowed neighbors to get into different focus groups, and based on how many bedrooms you wanted or your lot size, they allowed you to develop a floor plan," he said. "If we got enough people to do this particular floor plan, then we could do an assembly production of our homes. And that really benefited us in terms of construction costs, timeline, labor costs."

Sherwood said initial estimates were $700 a square foot. By purchasing his home alongside his neighbors, he spent $400 a square foot.

" The group buy was kind of like therapy in a way," Sherwood said. "Because we all were doing this together, and you didn't feel alone or scared."

Sherwood said custom finishes and small details made sure the neighborhood he returned to wasn't "cookie cutter" compared to the pre-fire hodgepodge of custom, older homes.

A familiar approach

Fire survivors in L.A. aren't the first to try out group purchasing after a large-scale disaster. Jennifer Gray Thompson, who leads the advocacy organization After the Fire, said that since her group launched in 2017, she has seen communities in California, Colorado and elsewhere purchase goods and services together to bring costs down.

In Maui, where the Lahaina Fire destroyed thousands of homes in 2023, many residents need trusses — structures made of wood or steel that form the base of a roof. It's inefficient to order them separately, especially in a place as hard to reach as Maui. So Gray Thompson said community members are working on placing a bulk order.

In Altadena, fire survivors are working together to buy things in bulk. And they're trying to find the most efficient and fair way to do it.

(

Libby Rainey

/

LAist

)

"Trusses are really hard to get on Maui," she said. "So what you have to find is what in the market is the barrier, and then you can often unlock that barrier by group buying."

But this type of coordination depends on a number of factors, including how tight-knit the recovering community is, how close together homes are, and how affluent the disaster zone is.

The collective decision making seen after the Tubbs Fire in Santa Rosa was harder to pull off in more rural communities destroyed in the 2021 Dixie Fire in Northern California, according to Gray Thompson. People lived farther apart and were scattered to the winds after their town was destroyed.

Still, she said, the idea that it's better to work together, as a community — the ethos of group purchasing — applies to all fire survivors.

" Nobody can walk through this alone. It's an inefficient way to do it. It's not healthy — emotionally or financially or politically or socially," she said. " All of rebuilding is a group project.”

That's what Morgan Whirledge is finding in Altadena.

" If you are a survivor, being able to turn that corner from dread ... that's like a huge part of this effort," he said. " We're all looking for those steps in this process that give us the resiliency and the optimism to carry forward."

Wherever they may fall in the spectrum, engaging in the idea of group purchasing has given some fire survivors something that's in even shorter supply than building materials: hope.

When Ariel Pittman thinks about the Eaton Fire, she said she thinks about the person with a disability who died waiting to be evacuated, and about the importance of knowing who’s in the area.

“We need to have a sense of responsibility for each other,” Pittman said.

And she thinks about how to get relief money to survivors immediately, Pittman said, “rather than making them fill out mountains of paperwork and drive all over town trying to get resources.”

Pittman, owner and founder of the art gallery Official Welcome in Westlake, is among a group of five women art workers and artists — including Kathryn Andrews, Andrea Bowers, Olivia Gauthier, and Julia V. Hendrickson — who created the mutual aid fund Grief and Hope.

Mutual aid refers to individuals pooling resources to help one another. This collective action can build new social relationships but can also represent a shared understanding that existing relief systems often fail to help everyone.

After the Palisades and Eaton fires a year ago, there was an outpouring of giving for artists and art workers who experienced loss. In small and large gestures, this aid created connection, served as recognition of this shared moment, and suggested new ways of relating to one another.

But those who received aid have ongoing needs beyond what those homegrown efforts have provided, and those who manage aid told LAist that more needs to be done to improve relief systems ahead of the next disaster.

Supporting the art community after the fires

The Grief and Hope fund was intended to draw attention to the economics of working in culture and to the art workers who go unrecognized. It was among a number of initiatives to support artists and art workers after the fires; it raised approximately $1.6 million, much of that already distributed to 271 people.

“I think we all had this shared sense too of just not wanting to see our art world disappear here. And that felt very prescient when the fires happened,” gallery director Gauthier said.

A recent survey about artists in the labor force found more than half of the artists reported being “somewhat or very worried” about being able to afford “food, housing, medical care, or utilities” and around 10% “juggled three or more jobs.”

While some artists do well financially, Pittman said, she has seen art workers living on the edge: self-employed workers, underpaid gallery and museum employees, people who are underemployed or managing multiple jobs.

A disaster only makes their situations more precarious.

The organizers of the mutual aid fund Grief and Hope. From left standing, clockwise: Olivia Gauthier; Ariel Pittman; Kathryn Andrews, Julia V. Hendrickson. Not pictured: Andrea Bowers.

(

Bonnie Ho

/

LAist

)

Grief and Hope’s organizers were already active in supporting artists before the fires, so it came naturally to continue to do so. They quickly set up a fiscal sponsor through The Brick nonprofit to manage the money and researched the minimum requirements needed to distribute aid.

Hendrickson, a small business owner of the arts agency Verge, checked applications for false information, but overall the group aimed to cut red tape — an example they hope bureaucracies can learn from.

The most dominant response Grief and Hope’s organizers heard from aid recipients in a survey was their gratitude for “how little information and hoops we required people to jump through,” Pittman said. She pointed out “the number of people who were just like, ‘thank you for not asking me to quantify my suffering to receive support.’”

Recipients also reported in the survey that they felt more connected.

With its organizers bearing close ties to the community, Grief and Hope was also a hub for information, channeling requests from people wanting to help and sharing opportunities like temporary housing, access to studio space and free art supplies.

In their efforts to distribute funding quickly, members of Grief and Hope recognized that they missed a lot of older people who weren’t on social media or connected to those that are. To remedy this, Grief and Hope organizers were able to distribute funding to those who were less online at a later date.

Pittman said this is another reason why there needs to be data for those distributing resources after a disaster, so that resources could be brought to people, rather than people having to find them or rely on an algorithm to learn about them.

Pittman said her group plans to make one more payment to applicants, but speaking for herself, she doesn’t see Grief and Hope being revived unless they’re uniquely situated to help.

“I hope that the people who saw what we did would do the same for us, that there would be another group like this in the future, for the next thing that needs it, you know?” she said.

And better data would mean future aid groups could get a head start. This group shares an understanding that with climate change, disasters will inevitably become more frequent.

One of Pittman’s collaborators, Andrews, an artist and founder of the gender equality nonprofit Judith Center, has now lost her home twice (first to the Bobcat Fire in 2020, second to the Palisades Fire).

She recognized this is a unique opportunity where people can come together and think about a different future, on how to construct a community anew, but also how to prepare for a different disaster response.

“I don't think a solution after the fact is the right approach because there's just not enough we can do. We need to reengineer it on the front end,” Andrews said. “And I think collectively we should make demands that the government does step up differently, that insurance performs differently.”

Needs after a disaster

Margaret Ross Griffith learned from her neighbor’s car camera that the Eaton Fire had made it to her Altadena home.

She also lost her and her husband’s art studios, their art storage, and also the period of time, the “soft space” she called it, that her family of four shared before her eldest daughter would go off to college.

When various relief efforts sprung up in the aftermath, the last thing she could imagine doing was driving anywhere to pick up anything.

“You're like, ‘I have to drive where?’” she recalled. “I mean, you're just in such a state of shock that driving anywhere is a hardship.”

Margaret Griffith learned from her neighbor’s car camera that the Eaton Fire had made it to her Altadena home.

(

Bonnie Ho

/

LAist

)

Griffith and her husband lost their art studios and their art storage in the Eaton Fire.

(

Bonnie Ho

/

LAist

)

Friends showed up for her and her family. At least two rented trucks to bring items to fill their empty rental home. One day five of her husband’s friends came with shovels and screen to remove and filter debris. The friends who took Griffith and her family in after the Eaton Fire said they could stay as long as they needed.

It also helped that she could receive funds quickly from Grief and Hope. There were immediate costs to cover, including paying for a security deposit and rent for a place that cost twice as much as their mortgage.

Even before having furniture for their rental, Griffith said with some amusement, she used aid from art groups to invest in a laser cutter. Griffith, an artist who makes intricate sculptures by cutting repeated patterns through metal and other materials, said it was an essential need for her art practice.

The value of having a space to create

At 72 years old, Coleen Sterritt had retired from teaching at a community college and had plans for her art practice and life in her community. She said that this has now been erased. The materials gathered for future projects have burned, along with her house and two art studios. The people in her former Altadena community who consider themselves too old to rebuild or who rented do not plan to return.

“It was like one day you had your life and the next day you did not,” Sterritt said. “It was just gone.”

After the Eaton Fire, Sterritt, her husband, and their two dogs have moved five times. She said it helps to be around people who understand what they went through. There is a sense of isolation among others, including family.

“They don't really understand that it's with us all the time. It's with us all the time,” she said.

Going to art galleries today is a reminder of the art she has lost: sculptural art in the last 15 years, and the works on paper that went back nearly 50 years, her notebooks, and her sketchbooks.

Sterritt received mutual aid from a GoFundMe a former student created for her. Sterritt was initially reluctant, but was persuaded that the GoFundMe was a connection to others who wanted to give, regardless of how much someone could contribute.

But as the one-year mark approached, she said she has noticed that the attention has begun to fade. Sterritt points out, for example, businesses that were so quick to offer discounts at the time of the fires, did not continue much past early 2025. By summertime, businesses appeared to have moved on, she said.

Recovery has been a full-time job — between working to create an inventory of all that was lost and participating in the lawsuit against SoCal Edison, Sterritt has not been able to make art.

Sterritt misses having a studio and the privacy it affords. The loss of a physical place for an artist isn’t the same as it is for a person whose profession isn’t so tied to having a space for creativity, Sterritt said. And space in Los Angeles is hard to come by.

Griffith, too, has found it challenging to make art since the fire. She said to do so, she needs to have three components — time, money and space. She recently was given access, however, to a temporary studio for her eight-week art residency with Arts at Blue Roof. There she seemed to relax.

“There're no distractions here. I'm not, you know, dealing with the burdens of the house rebuild when I come into this room,” she said in an interview at her Blue Roof studio. 

She is not expecting her new home to be ready until 2027, so she hopes that organizations continue to offer studio space to those affected by the fires.

And she hopes people do not forget how long recovery takes.

Funding for this story was provided by UC Berkeley's Greater Good Science Center, as part of its "Spreading Love Through the Media" initiative, supported by the John Templeton Foundation.

In his final year in office, Gov. Gavin Newsom plans to go after large investors buying and owning California housing — in the same week that President Donald Trump also took rhetorical aim at Big Landlord.

It’s an unlikely meeting of the minds of two political foes who, in a race to head off the electorate's concerns about affordability, have landed upon the same populist message: Blame Wall Street.

Newsom plans to say during his State of the State address to lawmakers on Thursday that he wants to work with them to regulate the practice of investors buying up large stocks of housing to rent out, forcing California residents to compete with them to afford buying a home, according to the governor’s office.

Proposals could include “enhanced state oversight and enforcement and potential changes to the state tax code,” according to the governor’s office.

“When housing is treated primarily as a corporate investment strategy, Californians feel the impact,” a source in the office said. “Prices go up, rents rise, and fewer people have a chance to buy a home.”

That sounds similar to a proposal Trump made on his social media platform Truth Social on Wednesday. The two previously closely aligned on policy related to clearing of homeless encampments.

“I am immediately taking steps to ban large institutional investors from buying more single-family homes,” the president wrote, sending stock prices of major publicly traded residential investment firms plummeting. He urged Congress to put the proposal into law and promised to unveil additional housing policy proposals at the World Economic Forum summit in Davos, Switzerland later this month.

Newsom is stopping short of calling for an outright ban on institutional investors’ ownership, though the source said he will seek to “curb” it with the goal of making home ownership more affordable for California residents.

He hasn’t yet proposed anything concrete. Whatever Newsom seeks to do, he’ll need the approval of the state Legislature.

Trump, for his part, did not offer any details about his proposal, such as how institutional investors would be defined under the proposed law or why he targeted single-family homes in particular. The White House’s press office did not respond to an email with those questions.

The twin announcements come after years of long-shot efforts by California progressives to address a surge in companies buying up single-family housing stock in the wake of the Great Recession. The issue has been the subject of renewed anxiety in post-fire Los Angeles, where a recent report by RedFin showed investors (loosely defined as any buyer with a name that includes “LLC,” “Inc” or “Corp”) have purchased 27 of 61 burned vacant lots that sold in Altadena — more than 40%.

Asked about that report in an interview on MS Now this week, Newsom said he had signed an executive order last year seeking to protect homeowners who find it too expensive to rebuild from falling for “predatory” lowball offers for their properties. But he acknowledged “the broader market conditions are challenging.”

The proposals mark new territory for Newsom’s housing affordability platform. The governor, now in his final year in office, has spent most of the past seven years focused on boosting construction. It’s a pivot toward populism for the governor, who is widely expected to run for president in 2028.

Blaming deep-pocketed investors for the nation’s housing woes has become an increasingly ideological-spanning exercise in recent years, with politicians as diverse as New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Vice President J.D. Vance championing the cause.

Shortly after Trump’s post, Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio, an enthusiastic supporter of the president, promised to introduce legislation in his own post on X.

Is this actually a problem in California?

Many housing industry professionals, economists and policy researchers are skeptical.

“It’s really hard to buy a house right now so people are looking for someone to blame for that, but I think (institutional investors) are more of a symptom of the affordability crisis than they are a perpetuator of it,” said Caitlin Gorback, a University of Texas at Austin economist who has studied investors’ effect on local real estate markets.

Research on the topic is mixed, though most analyses have found that by taking owner-occupied homes and converting them into rentals, these companies tend to increase the supply of rentals. That puts downward pressure on rents, while taking away purchasable homes, leading to higher prices.

Fewer than 3% of all single-family homes in the state are owned by companies that own at least 10 properties.That also takes away opportunities for would-be homeowners to buy a coveted single-family home. But even that comes with an under-appreciated upside, said Gorback: They provide more priced-out renters the opportunity to live in single-family homes — typically in wealthier, whiter and higher-resourced neighborhoods — something historically reserved for those who can afford to buy.

While apartment buildings are commonly owned and managed by large financial companies, single-family rentals weren’t seen as Wall Street-worthy money-making opportunities until the aftermath of the Great Recession. Since then, companies like Invitation Homes, Blackstone, Progress Residential and AMH Homes have typically focused on markets with relatively low prices and rapidly growing populations.

That doesn’t describe California. As a result, larger investors — however defined — make up a relatively small share of single-family landlords in the state. Fewer than 3% of all single-family homes in the state are owned by companies that own at least 10 properties, according to an analysis by the California Research Bureau, which conducts research for state lawmakers. A mere 20,066 are owned by firms with portfolios of 1,000 units or more. The largest of those owners is Invitation Homes, which owns over 11,000 homes in the state and reached a settlement with Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office last year over allegations it price-gouged tenants and illegally raised rents on more than 1,900 properties.

There are more than 16 million rental units across the state, according to Census data.

Though attacking big monied investors for the high cost of housing is a “huge distraction,” it has obvious political appeal, said Stan Oklobdzija, a UC Riverside public policy professor. “Attacking institutional investors is the latest iteration of appearing to do something without actually doing anything. …It's just kind of archetypical cheap talk.”

For nearly a decade, Democrats in the state Legislature have proposed bills to track or ban the practice. Former Gov. Jerry Brown in 2018 vetoed a bill to create a registry of institutional investors that own 100 or more single-family homes, noting that “collecting the data would not stop the purchase of these homes by private investors.”

In 2024, lawmakers proposed banning investors that own at least 1,000 single-family homes from buying more houses and renting them out, prohibiting institutional investors from buying single-family homes for any reason and banning developers from selling entire new single-family subdivisions to investors to rent. All three bills died in committees.

Assemblymember Alex Lee, author of the first proposal, revived the bill last year. It passed the Assembly and awaits a hearing in a Senate committee.

Lee, a Democratic Socialist who has long critiqued the role of big money in the state's real estate market, said he was "flabbergasted" to find himself on the same page with Trump, whom he described as a "far-right fascist." Though he expressed doubts that the Trump administration would follow through with the promises the president made in his social media post, he said that "Democrats need to wake up to this populist, but righteous, position."

"We can’t let the far-right capture the housing positions that the people care about," Lee said.

Newsom evidently agrees.

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