The Brief

When you buy a shirt, the tag tells you the price. Whether it’s clothing, food or rent, knowing how much you will spend is a pretty straightforward question … for most items.

But buying a car — new or used — has always been trickier. The number you may see in television ads or plastered on the car’s windshield at the dealership is not always what you end up paying.

That’s because the manufacturer’s suggested retail price — or MSRP — is, as the name suggests, just a suggestion. And it doesn’t include extra costs, like government fees or markups from the dealers for certain features.

But now, a new California law now limits how much dealers can add on and potentially make things clearer for consumers.

As of Thursday, the Combating Auto Retail Scams (CARS) Act prohibits a dealer from misrepresenting the total cost of the vehicle they’re selling you. And if you’re planning to lease the car, a dealer cannot mislead you about the terms of the lease.

But what does this new law mean exactly making your next experience at a car dealership less stressful — and potentially cheaper? Here’s what to look for if you or someone you know is buying a car after Oct. 1, 2026:

The total price, with no surprises

Car sellers must now provide you with a “total price,” which has to include “any dealer price adjustment and the cost of any item installed on the vehicle.”

According to the DMV, the total price must show up in ads or in any initial written communication, which includes “email, text, document, or any form mentioning the vehicle or financing.”

Transparency about add-ons

As you’re choosing a car, the dealer now must tell you — at least once — which add-ons are not actually required. They also have to be transparent that you can purchase or lease the vehicle without that extra feature.

This disclosure, the law states, has to be “in writing and shall be clear and conspicuous.”

Frankness about financing

When you’re talking about financing, the seller has to confirm what the total cost will be after the financing term — how much will you have paid the dealer altogether, once you’re done with all the monthly payments?

If you’re leasing the car, the dealership also has to tell you the total cost after the leasing term ends.

More clarity on leasing vs. buying

Now that this new law has passed, there cannot be any confusion whether you are leasing or buying the car.

The seller must be straightforward with the consumer about the terms of the final agreement.

A right to change your mind

If you’re buying a used car, the law now gives you the right to a three-day “cool-down period” where the purchase can be cancelled — for any reason.

However, there are a few conditions:

• The vehicle must be valued at less than $50,000
• The seller is permitted to set mileage limits (the DMV estimates around 400 miles)
• The seller can charge you a restocking fee (the DMV estimates something between $200) 

The legislation has received the support of legal aid groups and bar associations.

“Car buyers will enjoy stronger consumer protections, including a clearer understanding of the total cost of the vehicle before signing the paperwork,” wrote attorney Stefan Lawrence in a bulletin for the California Lawyers’ Association.

However, Lawrence added that the CARS Act could add more work for car dealerships, as it “introduces a new layer of regulatory complexity with respect to advertising, sales practices, and add-on products.”

If you suspect a car dealership is not complying with the new law, the DMV recommends you file a complaint online or call (800) 777-0133.

On a September evening, Adam Johnson, 40, settled on his porch chair in Morgantown, West Virginia, to go over his ballot for the upcoming midterm election.

Chatting through all the races and the different candidates, he worked to figure out who best represented his values. But rather than discussing it with a friend or family member, he held an hours-long discussion with ChatGPT — a chatbot powered by a large language model (LLM) owned by OpenAI, an AI research company.

A graphic designer studying to be an illustrator, Johnson said ChatGPT is a significant part of his life. He uses it for meal planning, assistance in job hunting and various other tasks around the house.

After prompting the AI-powered chatbot to make a list of all the races on his ballot this year, Johnson dug deeper.

Johnson is one of a growing number of voters using chatbots to research their ballots for the first midterm election since AI has taken the country by storm. About half of American adults report using AI-powered chatbots and about 42 percent of users said they use it to search for information, according to the Pew Research Center.

Several voters NPR spoke with said they rely on chatbots for down-ballot races — with thinner news coverage, to make tables comparing candidates for governors' races and to verify or debunk viral claims. Some have been using it to create tools to help others look up their own ballots. Experts say the properties that make chatbots useful also make them subtly persuasive and eager to please.

"It might select some things that would reinforce and persuade you even more towards the way that you were leaning already," said Rafael Batista, a fellow at John Hopkins University, who studies how AI shapes the way people experience the world. "So you leave more confident, without necessarily learning more about the world."

Since AI companies don't disclose how their commercial models are trained or how they choose which sources to draw on, it's hard to know what biases might shape their answers, Batista said.

Anthropic, the company that owns Claude, a chatbot, and Gemini, a Google-owned chatbot, did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokesperson for OpenAI, directed NPR to its election information and safeguards page which notes that the company continues to "monitor bias in our models to keep ChatGPT's responses politically neutral."

Concerns about AI

Johnson in West Virginia continued his research by outlining his political beliefs for ChatGPT. He stated that he usually votes for Republicans, unless those candidates are part of the Make America Great Again movement, in which case he votes for Democrats or a third party.

While deciding between candidates for the Senate race, Johnson nudged the chatbot about other issues he found important.

Johnson recognizes that AI-powered chatbots have sycophantic qualities.

"ChatGPT is just kind of a people pleaser," he said. "Whatever you lean towards, it will speak positively about it."

Still, Batista from JHU said that knowing these models are agreeable and persuasive, is not enough to "protect our minds from these influences."

Voters use chatbots in a variety of ways

Lisa Veldran, 65, was a staffer in the City Council in Madison, Wisconsin for almost four decades before retiring. This summer, she used Gemini to answer very specific questions she had about the primary election for governor.

After Sara Rodriguez, the lieutenant governor of Wisconsin, dropped out of the race, Veldran needed to choose between two candidates: Francesca Hong and David Crowley. She prompted Gemini to make a comparative table of both candidates.

Veldran said the chatbot can be a research tool, but it's not something that determines her life.

"You also have to keep in mind what's running these chatbots and AI in general," she said. "Who's paying to build these bots and what is their ultimate goal."

Lakshmi Iyer, an author living in Exton, Pa., describes herself as a power user of chatbots and thinks "it is capable of a lot of things, but the human in the loop is absolutely essential."

Iyer, 50, is part of They See Blue, an Indian American grassroots Democratic organization to drive up voter registration.

She did not use a chatbot to research her ballot, she said, but she used Claude, to create Ballot Lookup — a website that can inform Pennsylvania's voters about who is on their ballot and their stance on certain issues.

The website is described as an "independent, volunteer-built, nonpartisan lookup," and Iyer built it to help voters who may not learn more about candidates by searching across various sources.

Like other users, Iyer is aware that if chatbots "can infer your political leanings, they will push you towards what you are leaning to." To keep her own bias in check, Iyer prompted Claude to pick statements from the candidates' own speeches or from their official websites.

Some users noted that the decimation of local media has left them with fewer options for learning about down-ballot races. Tyler Black from Nashville, Tennessee, said he didn't use chatbots for House or Senate but is using them to learn about local candidates.

Black, who is a vice president at a software development company, is aware that chatbots sometimes hallucinate — that's when chatbots respond to prompts with false, misleading or fabricated answers. To overcome that problem, he often checks the information one chatbot has provided him against another.

Batista from JHU said that method of fact-checking is better than using the same model twice, but he hasn't seen evidence that it is effective.

If users are using chatbots to research their vote, Batista said, they should frame their prompts in a way that their personal preferences are hidden, and they could use incognito mode so the chatbot doesn't have much prior information on them.

Adam Johnson in West Virginia is still researching and chatting with ChatGPT about his ballot. The county commission races are still on his list to look into. But he feels like AI helped him learn everything else he needed to know for November.

"I wouldn't feel too bad if I had to do the election today," Johnson said.
Copyright 2026 NPR

The FBI arrested a California real estate agent at the Los Angeles airport as she was leaving the country and accused her of spying for China on the president of Taiwan’s family, federal officials said.

Wanying Zhang, who went by the name Heather, surveilled the Taiwanese president’s son and his family last year for the Chinese government, according to the FBI.

Zhang, 34, who lives in Irvine, was arrested Sunday at Los Angeles International Airport on charges for working for China as an unregistered agent, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli said. Zhang took photos and videos of her targets and sent license plate information to Chinese officials, according to a federal criminal complaint.

Zhang is a naturalized U.S. citizen, Essayli said on Fox News’ “The Big Weekend Show.” She was arrested as she was departing for a flight to China. It wasn’t immediately clear if she had an attorney who could speak on her behalf. She was due to appear Monday afternoon in federal court in Los Angeles.

The case is the latest in a series of Justice Department prosecutions aimed at rooting out alleged covert agents advancing Beijing’s interests on American soil.

Many of the cases have centered on what the Justice Department says is China’s aggressive effort to locate and harass pro-democracy activists living in the U.S. and suppress their speech. The Justice Department also says Beijing is determined to sway American public opinion in its favor by cultivating relationships with political figures seen as having access to the levers of power.

The Chinese Embassy in the U.S. did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday and the Foreign Ministry in Beijing was closed for holidays.

Taiwan’s Presidential Office confirmed President Lai Ching-te’s relatives were the targets, without specifying if it was the president’s son, saying that “this is a classic case of transnational repression.”

“Taiwan condemns in the strongest terms such barbaric acts — which disregard human rights and national sovereignty and aim to suppress, threaten, or even harm individuals advocating for freedom and democracy or their families — as such behavior should not be tolerated in the civilized world,” spokesperson Karen Kuo said in a statement.

The criminal complaint does not name the alleged target, but the FBI’s rapid response account on the social media platform X said it was the president’s son. Ting-Yu Lai, the president’s elder son, lives and works in the Seattle area as an engineer.

At the direction of Chinese officials, Zhang and another person flew to Seattle on Sept. 1, 2025, and conducted surveillance outside the target’s home, according to the affidavit. A home security camera near the target’s home recorded the pair filming the target and their family from a vehicle, the affidavit said.

Zhang then allegedly sent a Chinese official information related to the surveillance, including photos, videos and license plate information from the target’s vehicles.

According to the affidavit, Zhang attended the University of International Relations in Beijing, which is affiliated closely with China’s intelligence apparatus. The affidavit said she and a classmate who became a Chinese government official had kept in contact since graduating around 2014, and he introduced her to another government official, and she was in contact with both in 2025.

Taiwan and China split after a civil war in 1949, but Beijing claims the island as part of its own territory. Lai, who was voted into office in 2024, has said that Taiwan and Beijing do not belong to each other and that the “People’s Republic of China has no right to represent Taiwan.”

China considers him a separatist and has called him a “destroyer of peace.”

While in office, Lai has stepped up spending on defense for Taiwan, notably pledging to increase defense spending from 3% to 5% of the GDP, and pushing through a special budget for the construction of a T-Dome air defense system.

In May, a Southern California mayor agreed to plead guilty to acting as an illegal agent for the Chinese government, and resigned from her city position. Eileen Wang, the mayor of Arcadia, had been charged with one count of acting in the U.S. as an illegal agent of a foreign government. She was accused of doing the bidding of Chinese officials, such as sharing articles favorable to Beijing, without prior notification to the U.S. government as required by law.

Sacramento State political science professor Kim Nalder was working out at a Sacramento gym in 2003 when she overheard a conversation about the upcoming recall election of then-Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat.

She remembers “guys in the weight room just saying, like, 'How cool would that be to have Arnold Schwarzenegger as our governor?'" she said. “It had nothing to do with policy at all.”

A few months later, the international action film star triumphed in a field of 135 candidates to replace Davis, who’d been re-elected the year before but had come under fire for rolling blackouts in the state and unpopular vehicle license fees. “The Governator” went on to serve nearly two terms.

If the election were just about whether or not Davis should keep his job, and not also who should replace him if he were recalled, Nalder doubts the Republican Schwarzenegger would ever have taken office. Accompanying him on the ballot were a host of other colorful characters, including actor Gary Coleman and porn star Mary Carey. Per the rules of the recall, the candidate with the most votes, not necessarily the majority, wins.

“I just think the recall probably wouldn't have happened — because there wasn't that much upset at Davis himself — if we didn't, you know, have any fun alternatives,” she said.

California voters this year are deciding whether to approve Proposition 5, which would do away with “the second question” of who should replace a state elected official if they are recalled. Instead, depending on the office and the timing, a replacement would be appointed or elected in a special election.

The measure was placed on the November ballot by Democratic lawmakers in 2024 with the support of the secretary of state and good governance groups Common Cause and League of Women Voters. It came in response to the 2021 attempted recall of Gov. Gavin Newsom. Republican lawmakers voted against it, arguing that it would dilute the power of the voters and add costs associated with follow-up special elections.

However, with 14 propositions on the ballot and not a dollar raised so far in support or opposition, both sides may have to rely on voters’ gut reactions.

The “weak gazelle”

Aside from the recall of Davis, the only other successful state recall this century was that of the author of Prop. 5, Democrat Josh Newman.

In 2017, Newman was a freshman lawmaker representing a purple Southern California district when he joined 27 of his colleagues in approving the gas tax, which added a 12 cent surcharge to every gallon of gas purchased in California to fund transportation projects. Republicans fiercely opposed the effort, arguing new taxes weren’t necessary. The bill passed with the bare minimum of votes.

Less than two weeks later, then-conservative commentator and now-San Diego Assemblymember Carl DeMaio told Orange County talk show hosts that gas tax opponents needed to use the “gazelle strategy,” to begin taking out lawmakers who’d approved the tax.

“We’ve identified that weak gazelle, the slowest gazelle, the one with the limp,” he said. “And that’s Josh Newman, in Orange County.”

Why Newman? Because he was elected by the slimmest margin of any senator, fewer than 2,500 votes.

In the ensuing weeks, DeMaio’s organization, Reform California, led the effort to recall Newman, helping to collect more than 64,000 signatures — equivalent to 20% of voters in the last election — and centering its campaign on Newman’s “deciding vote” on the tax.

Close to 60% of voters chose to recall Newman in June 2018, replacing him with Republican Ling Ling Chang. The recall ended the Democrats’ supermajority in the state Senate.

Gov. Gray Davis speaks at an anti-recall labor union rally in San Jose on Oct. 5, 2003.

(

David McNew

/

Getty Images

)

In a recent interview with CalMatters, DeMaio stood by his “weak gazelle” strategy.

“If voters want to stop something from happening and being repeated, then mid-term, sometimes the only thing they can do is to use a recall as a way of expressing their opposition,” he said.

But Newman said that kind of “political gamesmanship” was not what former progressive governor Hiram Johnson intended when he proposed the law in 1911.

In a speech, Johnson characterized the recall process as “the precautionary measure by which a recalcitrant official can be removed.”

Newman said he doesn’t feel he fit that bill.

“I didn't do anything other than cast a tough vote,” he said. “Was I malfeasant? I hardly think so. Especially given the state of the state's road systems at the time.”

Newman made recall reform one of his priorities when he was elected back into office in 2020. After an expensive recall election for Newsom, other Democrats had the political will and Newman put forward Senate Constitutional Amendment 1, which became Prop. 5.

Newman said the title of the proposition, which says that it “Changes Recall Election Process for Statewide Officers,” may confuse voters, since legislators do not hold statewide office, though all California legislative races would be affected by the change.

How would it work?

If Prop. 5 passes, eliminating the replacement question, the governor would call a special election within about four months to replace a recalled state senator or assemblymember. If the governor was recalled within the first two years of their term, the secretary of state would call a special election. If they are in the second two years of their term, the lieutenant governor would finish the governor’s term. The ousted official would be allowed to run for the same office in the special election.

If a statewide official such as the state treasurer, attorney general, or insurance commissioner were recalled, the governor would appoint their replacement to serve until the next scheduled election.

If Prop. 5 were to pass, DeMaio said the gap in representation may dissuade voters from approving a recall, even if they want a change.

“The argument will now be made, if Prop. 5 passes, that if you vote yes on recall, then you're going to be without a representative for months, if not longer, and so you're going to silence your community,” he said.

He said extra special elections would lead to higher costs to taxpayers. The 2021 attempted recall of Newsom cost about $200 million to administer — a cost that would double if there were two separate elections.

However, Nalder suspects the change would lead to fewer recalls in general, likely a guiding force in Democrats’ support of the effort.

“It's relatively easy to get the signatures, and it causes a lot of chaos and costs a lot of extra money,” she said. “That's easier for Democrats to want to change because they're the ones who win more in the races.”

A Public Policy Institute of California poll in early September found the measure faces long odds, though: 59% of likely voters said they likely would vote “no” and just 35% said they would vote “yes.”

Nalder said the poll was conducted before voters had done their ballot homework, and upon learning more, they’ll likely align with their party’s positions.

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