The Brief

The main contenders to become California’s new U.S. senator want voters to see them in a certain light:

Rep. Adam Schiff as a defender of democracy; Rep. Katie Porter as an anti-corruption crusader; Rep. Barbara Lee as a courageous progressive; Eric Early as a champion for the “forgotten Americans;” and Steve Garvey as a commonsense consensus builder.

But their ads, slogans and speeches offer only a glimpse into who they are, or what they have done — or plan to do — to tackle some of Californians’ most pressing concerns. All three Democrats have years of voting records while serving in Congress.

All but Early are set to debate for the first time in this race on Monday evening. Ahead of the event, CalMatters sent each campaign a questionnaire and analyzed their records and stances on issues such as border, immigration, criminal justice, foreign policy, economy, labor and housing.

Here’s a detailed look at where they stand on those issues — and how they differ from each other:

Border and immigration

The three Democrats share a similar track record on immigration and border security issues.

They all voted against Republican proposals to bar federally-funded housing to migrants, limit asylum eligibility and condemn the use of public school facilities to shelter migrants. They have all supported — or even co-sponsored — bills to provide a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and their children, establish independent oversight on border security activities and limit the president’s ability to restrict undocumented immigrant entries.

All support expanding unemployment insurance benefits to undocumented immigrants seeking work.

At a November immigration forum, all three Democrats criticized President Joe Biden’s policy that banned most migrants from seeking asylum if they crossed the border illegally. Porter said the policy was “dishonoring this nation’s history and our future.” Schiff and Lee both called it “wrong.”

Biden — noting that previous congressional actions tied his hands — decided to continue building former President Donald Trump’s Mexican border wall in October, shocking some Democrats. The decision drew instant criticism from Lee, who urged White House to reverse course in a tweet.

Lee, Schiff and Porter all agreed a generic border wall is ineffective in response to CalMatters’ questionnaire this month. Schiff and Porter both advocated for increased use of detection technologies at the border.

Porter, however, said some “site-specific” barriers do work, “for example, in dangerous areas where the lives of migrants and U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel are at risk when there are unauthorized crossings and search and rescue missions.”

Migrants stay in a makeshift camp in Jacumba Hot Springs in San Diego on Nov. 18, 2023.

(

Adriana Heldiz

/

CalMatters

)

Of the three Democrats, Lee appears to be the most staunch critic of allocating more funds to federal border patrol agencies.

In 2019, Lee voted against authorizing a $4.6 billion humanitarian aid and security funding package at the southern border, while Schiff and Porter voted in favor. The package — backed by Republicans and moderate Democrats — passed the House without the stronger protections in migrant facilities that House progressives had supported.

Lee called for a 50% budget cut for the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol in statements to CalMatters. Funding for the Department of Homeland Security, she said, would be better spent on “meaningful immigration reform.”

“ICE is rotten to the core,” Lee said in response to the CalMatters questionnaire. She is the only Senate candidate to have voted against creating the agency in 2002, when Schiff — then in his first term — supported it.

Porter told CalMatters she generally does not support additional funding for the agency, but said she wants border patrol employees to “receive pay commensurate with their work” to help “recruit a workforce that can meet the needs of our border communities.”

Schiff said Congress should provide aid to border communities and increase resources and personnel at ports of entry to help handle an influx of asylum seekers.

The top two Republicans — Garvey and Early — both support the border wall, additional funding for border patrol agents and tightened restrictions on border entries. Both said the nation should prioritize immigration applications from people legally present in the United States and both oppose offering undocumented immigrants unemployment benefits.

Early argued he supports a path to citizenship for “illegal immigrants who have enlisted in and participated honorably in our military.” Currently, non-citizens can only join the military if they are legal permanent residents, but a Democrats-backed bill in Congress would allow undocumented DREAMers to serve in the military.

Garvey visited the Mexico border as one of his first campaign events last month and said he wants to complete the wall.

Crime and guns

On this topic, the Republican and Democratic candidates seem to share some common ground.

They have all stressed the need to invest in mental health services as well as policing to address crime, but the devil’s in the details.

The three Democrats want more funding to reform policing methods. They all voted for de-escalation training for police, more federal dollars for violence intervention initiatives and restricting police use of chokeholds after George Floyd’s death at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer in 2020.

Garvey and Early’s campaigns called for more funding for police departments and law enforcement officers, as well as the need to secure the southern border.

All three Democrats support boosting funding for mental health treatment programs. Lee — arguing poverty is the root cause of crime — believes raising the minimum wage, expanding access to healthcare and legalizing marijuana will address the “structural problems” that lead to criminal acts, her campaign says.

Porter’s campaign championed her Mental Health Justice Act — a 2022 bill to give grants to governments to recruit and train mental health professionals to respond to emergency calls. Schiff and Lee both voted for the measure.

Garvey’s campaign said he also supports funding to treat mental health problems and drug addiction, arguing they often contribute to gun violence and homelessness. Early, via a campaign spokesperson, advocated for a “rebuild” of the nation’s mental health system “that allows for the severely mentally ill to be permanently housed and cared for,” arguing that services were “decimated” in the 1960s — when people were discharged from institutions and placed in community-based care centers amid the civil rights movement.

Gunsmith Don Gregory shows off two new single-action firearms recently released by Juggernaut Tactical in Orange on Thursday, Sept. 21, 2023. Photo by Alisha Jucevic for CalMatters

(

Alisha Jucevic

/

CalMatters

)

On gun policies, Garvey supports “common-sense measures” such as pre-sale background checks and an assault weapon ban — something mainly supported by Democrats, according to his campaign. “We can keep guns out of the hands of criminals while also protecting Second Amendment rights,” his campaign said in a response to CalMatters’ questions.

The candidates are otherwise split along party lines. For example, all three Democrats oppose the federal death penalty, while Republicans argue the opposite.

But there are nuanced differences, especially among Democrats. They all voted against legislation to permanently raise fentanyl-related drugs to the highest class of illegal substances — a GOP-led bill Biden urged Congress to pass. Lee, however, was the only candidate to vote against even temporarily doing so.

Schiff — a former prosecutor in Los Angeles — has the most controversial track record on criminal justice issues due to his past support for tough-on-crime policies.

Schiff was among 48 Democrats to support the Thin Blue Line Act in 2017 to apply the federal death penalty to cop killers — something Early supports. Schiff has since publicly spoken against the sentence. In his campaign response to CalMatters, Schiff credited his change of heart to “technological advancements” that revealed “deep flaws” with the death penalty and a “disproportionate application” of the sentence on people of color.

As a state senator, Schiff authored legislation to crack down on juveniles, including a bill to create year-long “boot camps” for teenagers found in possession of marijuana at school and another to try kids 14 years and older as adults if they commit murder or rape.

In Congress, he introduced legislation in 2009 to increase funding to a controversial program to place more cops in communities, supported language to exclude asylum seekers and immigrants from privacy protections and voted for the Protect and Serve Act in 2018 to impose stricter penalties on assaulting law enforcement officers, which most Democrats voted for. Lee voted against both measures.

Schiff’s record irked criminal justice activists, who in a 2021 letter urged Gov. Gavin Newsom not to appoint Schiff as the next state attorney general. He has since softened some of his positions on criminal justice. In February 2023, he said his viewpoint had changed since the 1990s. “I’ve learned that some of the policies of the 90s didn’t work,” he told ABC7 last year.

Foreign policy and defense

The issue of a ceasefire in the Gaza war highlights a key split among the three Democratic hopefuls.

A day after the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel, Lee called for a permanent ceasefire from the stage of a Senate candidate debate — one of the first members of Congress to do so. Schiff called for “unequivocal support” for Israel, while Porter cautioned against Islamophobia and mourned the lives lost on both sides.

For months afterward, as the casualty numbers rose in Gaza, Schiff and Porter both called for a “humanitarian pause” — aligning with the Biden administration’s policy. But as calls for a permanent ceasefire grew, Porter shifted her stance in a Dec. 18 statement, calling for a “lasting bilateral ceasefire” that “brings remaining hostages home, secures Israel’s safety, removes Hamas from operational control of Gaza, and invests in creating a better economic and political architecture for Palestinians in Gaza.”

When asked to explain why she shifted her stance, Porter’s campaign pointed to her Dec. 18 statement, in which she seemed to suggest Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s rejection of Palestinian governance of Gaza was the reason.

“His remarks and actions necessitate tough conversations with our ally Israel about its long-term strategy and among U.S. policymakers about our approach in the Middle East,” she said in the statement.

Schiff, however, has stood by his initial position, arguing that a permanent ceasefire would “perpetuate Hamas terrorist control of Gaza,” according to his campaign.

All three Democrats signed on as co-sponsors of a largely symbolic bipartisan House resolution affirming Israel’s right to defend itself. But Lee was the only candidate to vote against the Hamas International Financing Prevention Act — a bipartisan bill that would sanction Hamas, its affiliates and governments providing aid to the group.

“The bill was opposed by major humanitarian organizations because it is overly broad and will hurt a lot of innocent Palestinians by making it harder if not impossible to receive humanitarian assistance,” Lee spokesperson Sean Ryan told CalMatters in an email.

An Israeli battle tank moves along the border between the Gaza Strip and southern Israel on Wednesday as battles between Israel and Hamas continue.

(

Jack Guez

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

Decades before Gaza, Lee shocked the world by being the lone vote against the Afghanistan war after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a decision that got her death threats then but now hailed as a show of courage by her supporters. 

Lee is still somewhat of a unicorn on foreign policy compared to her opponents.

In 2002, Lee voted against authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, while Schiff voted in favor. Lee has since sponsored a resolution to repeal the authorization most years; it wasn’t until 2021 that the House passed it, with Schiff and Porter both voting in favor.

Lee was also the only candidate to support a U.S. troop removal from Syria in March 2023 — a measure most Democrats, including Rep. Nancy Pelosi, voted against. Critics of the bill said a removal could give Islamic State terrorists time to reorganize, the Associated Press reported.

Additionally, Lee touts herself as the most consistent in calling for cutting the nation’s “bloated” defense budget. She has voted against authorizing defense and military spending when Schiff and Porter voted in favor, voting records show.

Schiff’s campaign said he wants to reduce the Pentagon’s budget by 10% and supports eliminating weapons systems the administration does not need or want. “There is far too much waste in the defense budget that must be eliminated,” his campaign said.

Porter’s campaign said the funding level needs to be indexed to national security threats and there needs to be more oversight. “I’ll never rubber stamp spending, but I believe investing in our servicemembers and their well-being is paramount,” the campaign said.

Both Republicans support increasing the defense budget. Neither Garvey nor Early supported a call for a ceasefire. They both argued Israel must have the ability to fight Hamas until it is destroyed, their campaigns said.

Economy and labor

Although far lower than during the COVID-19 pandemic, inflation remains high, jumping from 3.1% to 3.4% in December. Experts attribute it to the rising cost of housing, and project it’s unlikely to last given a housing market cool-down, NBC reported.

Republican candidates blame the Biden administration. Garvey attributed it to “excessive government spending” while Early criticized the reduction of domestic energy production — a GOP talking point that conflicts with record-high U.S. oil production in October.

Democrats slam corporations instead. Porter — a self-proclaimed warrior taking on Wall Street interests — argued inflation worsened because businesses are overcharging customers, pointing to record-high profits for big corporations. Similarly, Lee blamed corporate greed. Apart from corporate profit, Schiff pointed to the supply chain interruption during the pandemic and a lack of housing as contributing factors.

Among the three Democrats, Schiff — a past member of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition — has historically been the most skeptical of federal spending. In 2005, he demanded a “rainy-day” reserve in the budget.

Schiff is the only Senate candidate to vote in favor of raising the debt ceiling last year to avoid a default. Lee and Porter — along with 38 other members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus — voted against it. Lee said she voted to stand up against “extreme MAGA Republicans holding our economy hostage,” and Porter — who has argued the debt ceiling should be abolished — criticized the measure for including “giveaways” to the oil and gas industry, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Schiff, who applied to join the Congressional Progressive Caucus last year but withdrew, voted multiple times against the “People’s Budget” — which contains all the caucus’ priorities and which has served as a purity test. Lee — the only other candidate in Congress at the time — voted in favor.

Lee is also the only candidate to sponsor the Curtail Executive Overcompensation Act, a measure increasing taxes on corporate CEOs. Lee and Porter are both sponsoring the Oligarch Act, another measure aimed to tax the rich, while Schiff is not. Schiff has, however, expressed support for repealing tax cuts for the wealthy made under the Trump administration.

Construction workers on site of a tiny homes village in Goshen on June 2, 2023. Photo by Larry Valenzuela, CalMatters/CatchLight Local

(

Larry Valenzuela

/

CalMatters/CatchLight Local

)

All three Democrats have gained union endorsements, although Schiff has won the most from statewide unions. All the Democrats support the Protecting the Right to Organize Act to override all state right-to-work laws and strengthen union protections. Garvey and Early both said that the decision belongs to states, not the federal government, according to their campaigns.

The five candidates also split along party lines on whether striking workers should be eligible for unemployment benefits — a controversial bill vetoed by Gov. Newsom last year. All three Democrats said those workers deserve the benefits. Early outright said no, while Garvey’s campaign told CalMatters that governments should stay out of disputes between unions and businesses.

All three Democrats believe the federal minimum wage — $7.25 per hour — should increase.

Lee called for a $50 hourly minimum wage during a forum last year, noting that’s the living wage one working adult with two children would have to make, according to an Massachusetts Institute of Technology estimate.

Porter’s campaign said she supports a $20 federal minimum wage and $25 for California, indexed to inflation. Schiff’s campaign said he supports a $20 federal minimum wage indexed to inflation, with a boost to $25 for health care workers.

Early believes the federal rate does not need to change and that an increase would worsen inflation, according to his campaign.

Garvey, on the other hand, did not give a specific number. “Each state and its voters have the ability to raise their minimum wage, as California has multiple times, beyond the federal minimum wage,” his campaign said.

Homelessness and housing

On California’s worsening homelessness crisis, Republican candidates say mental health problems are the main culprit — not the lack of affordable housing.

Early, in his campaign’s response to CalMatters’ questions, said the cause of the state’s homelessness is “severe mental illness” and “soft-on-crime” policies, referring to Proposition 47 — a ballot measure passed in 2014 that reduced penalties for certain thefts and drug offenses.

“The biggest factor is manifestly not insufficient low-income housing,” the campaign’s statement read.

Garvey’s campaign said the biggest driving factors of the problem are “drug and alcohol addiction” and “mental health issues.” During a Wednesday visit to a Sacramento homeless encampment, he said he wants a “deep dive” into how taxpayer dollars are spent to battle the homelessness crisis.

An unidentified person carries a blanket along Alvarado Street in Los Angeles.

(

David Swanson

/

Getty Images

)

But the Democratic candidates all argued a lack of affordable housing is driving the crisis.

The homelessness problem is a “direct result” of failed federal housing policies over the past decades, Porter argues on her website. Her campaign said she supports a “major investment” in housing, including a fully-funded federal Section 8 program and an expansion of the national Low Income Housing Tax Credit.

Lee’s campaign said homelessness is a housing issue “at its core.” Like Porter, she also called for a fully-funded Section 8 program and a national rent control standard — one that the Biden administration has pushed for. She believes expanding health care access, offering free college and raising the minimum wage would help ease homelessness in the state, her campaign said. She also touted legislation she introduced to help renters, such as the DEPOSIT Act, which would allow federal programs to cover security deposit and moving expenses for those using the Housing Choice vouchers.

Similarly, Schiff’s campaign said he also supports expanding Section 8 vouchers and providing wraparound services. Additionally, his campaign stressed the importance of easing regulations and offering tax incentives to encourage the build-out of affordable housing — something Garvey and Early also support.

On Schiff’s campaign website, he touted legislation he introduced and supported to fight homelessness, including the Affordable and Homeless Housing Incentive Act, which would offer tax incentives for homeless shelters.

Asked if they support more federal funding to combat the crisis, only Early’s campaign said no. Garvey’s campaign said funding for housing should prioritize projects in “low-income areas, and near job and transit centers.”

Schiff and Lee have both touted their success securing earmarked funds for housing and homelessness. Porter, however, is a staunch opponent of earmark requests, arguing the funding goes to lawmakers’ “pet projects” and requests should be rejected. She has signed onto letters instead, urging her colleagues to approve grants to homelessness assistance programs.

Facing a multi-million-dollar budget shortfall for the upcoming school year, Pasadena Unified's school board voted unanimously this week to finalize a plan to send layoff notices to more than 160 staff members as part of an effort to balance its budget that began last fall.

The district has maintained that the job reductions are necessary because of a $30 million budget deficit, part of a financial crisis made worse by the Eaton Fire.

California schools must notify employees about potential layoffs for the following school year by March 15. The number of current employees who will be out of a job next year is still unclear, in part, because people may be reassigned to vacant positions. In the past, PUSD has also rescinded some layoff notices before they took effect.

Parents, teachers and union leaders at the Thursday meeting criticized the district for targeting teachers and school staff for layoffs instead of administrative positions.

“ Teaching for PUSD means anxiety every March as it approaches, because we don't know if we're going to get to keep our job or not,” said Genevieve Miller, a PUSD teacher who said her children also graduated from the district. “ There's a different way forward.”

Board members acknowledged the decision they made was difficult.

“ I just want to be very clear that this is not the outcome that anybody prefers,” Board member Yarma Velázquez said. “Workforce reductions and the continuous, year after year position of being in this place where we have to reduce positions is draining and it is painful.

“I am very aware of what the implications are for all of the people that work here at PUSD.”

The board meeting

At the meeting, which started at 4 p.m. and nearly lasted until midnight, parents highlighted the potential of families and teachers choosing to leave the district because of the layoffs.

“ Right now, the [PUSD] community is in fight mode, as you can see from the turnout and other comments being made here tonight,” said parent Neil Tyler. “But if you approve these resolutions as proposed tonight, a large chunk of the community will quickly shift to flight mode and the death spiral of this district will begin.”

Jonathan Gardner, president of United Teachers of Pasadena, told the board that the cuts meant the district would lose dozens of middle and high school teachers and child development staff.

“ The best thing for kids and staff is always stability and making sure that we have full staff,” Gardner said. “The priorities should be working from the student experience out. Instead, what we see is millions and millions of dollars being spent on contracted services and millions and millions being spent on extra staffing at the central office.”

Speakers also noted that Pasadena Unified had endured years of budget cuts, which affected teachers, librarians and office staff.

Others said PUSD was failing to meet its requirement under California law to commit at least 55% of the district’s education expenses to teacher salaries.

LAist reached out to the district for comment on this but has not yet received a response.

Pasadena Unified board members said the cuts were necessary, especially after warnings from regulators that they could be out of compliance with requirements to balance the budget.

“For the sake of the district's solvency, I feel like it would be irresponsible if I took an action that put this district in jeopardy,” board member Michelle Bailey said Thursday night. “I can't in good conscience take that kind of action.”

About the budget issues

Concerns over declining enrollment numbers, which are tied to funding, have been growing since the Eaton Fire.

A report commissioned by a state agency recommended that the state increase its funding for the school system to help with fire recovery.

Some observers said Pasadena Unified’s budget issues date back much longer than that.

“Over the past 30 years, Pasadena Unified has faced a mounting fiscal calamity, one that you can no longer ignore or postpone,” Octavio Castelo, director of business advisory services for the Los Angeles County Office of Education, told Pasadena Unified’s board in November. “Despite your best efforts and intentions, the district has not been able to live within its means."

Cutting staff will likely mean losing some school programs, including language and music.

“ You have Mary Jackson [Elementary in Altadena] — it's a science magnet school, and they're cutting the science teacher,” Gardner, the teacher’s union president, told LAist. “That's the heart of the school.”

What happens next

The layoff notices are expected to be sent to affected staff members by mid-March.

The district will have until summer to finalize the list.

K-12 education reporter Mariana Dale contributed reporting.

The Los Angeles Unified School Board voted unanimously Friday to place Superintendent Alberto Carvalho on paid administrative leave pending the outcome of an investigation.

The FBI searched Carvalho’s home and district offices Wednesday. A DOJ spokesperson said the agency had a court-authorized warrant but declined to provide additional details. The FBI told LAist’s media partner CBS LA that the underlying affidavit remained under court-ordered seal.

The board also appointed current Chief of School Operations Andres Chait as acting superintendent after the seven-hour closed meeting Thursday and Friday.

“I know that this is a very challenging time,” said Board President Scott Schmerelson in a brief public statement after the decision was announced. “I want you to know that the board believes in you, supports you and knows that you will continue to do your very best to support the students and families of the district.”

Schmerelson clarified in an email to LAist, he was referring to Chait. The seven-member board exited the meeting room without taking questions. Carvalho was not present and has not made a public statement since the searches Wednesday.

The district posted a statement online later in which Schmerelson wrote “today’s action is aimed at fulfilling our promise to students and families to provide an excellent public education without distraction.”

The board’s decision provided clarity about district leadership, but did not shed light on the reason for the searches, which have been the subject of widespread speculation.

“While we understand the need for information, we cannot discuss the specifics of this matter pending investigation,” read the district’s statement.

Who is the acting superintendent?

Chait has worked for the district for nearly three decades. The chief of school operations’ responsibilities are varied and include athletics, the district’s office of emergency management and staff investigations. Chait has presented to the board on everything from school safety to the cell phone ban and the district’s calendar.

Chief of School Operations Andres Chait has worked for LAUSD for nearly three decades.

(

Courtesy of Los Angeles Unified School District

)

“I am humbled by the Board’s confidence in appointing me to serve as acting superintendent during this critical time," Chait said in the district’s statement. "Our focus remains clear: to ensure stability, continuity, and strong leadership for our students, families, and employees."

What we know about AllHere, LAUSD’s AI tool

A spokesperson for the FBI in Miami confirmed Wednesday’s L.A. searches are linked to a search of a South Florida home the same day. That property, identified by local media outlets, belongs to Debra Kerr, who was associated with the company LAUSD contracted to create a short-lived AI tool called AllHere.

Federal authorities have not connected AllHere to this week’s investigation.

Los Angeles Unified approved a $6.2 million contract with AllHere in June 2023 to develop a tool that would create an “individual acceleration plan,” using district data and featuring an artificial intelligence chatbot.

LAUSD debuted “Ed” the following March as a "personal assistant" to students that would point them toward mental health resources and nudge students who were falling behind.

Within three months of its debut, the company behind Ed, AllHere, furloughed the bulk of its staff; its CEO was later charged with fraud. The district defended the process it used to debut that chatbot, which cost $3 million.

Parents and educators demanded transparency after the district shut down the chatbot.

Many questions remain

The federal investigation comes at a time when LAUSD is financially strained, cutting hundreds of jobs, and facing pressure from the district’s largest labor unions to settle new contracts.

SEIU Local 99, which represents school support staff and United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA) have issued statements calling on the district to clearly communicate about the status of the superintendent and the investigation.

"UTLA educators and our school communities have long raised concerns about LAUSD rapidly increasing spending on education tech and outside contractors, while investment in classrooms and educators has declined,” UTLA wrote in a statement provided to LAist.

Carvalho has been superintendent of LAUSD since 2022, and the board unanimously renewed his contract in 2025. Prior to coming to L.A., Carvalho had worked for the Miami-Dade County school district for decades, 30 years as a teacher and the last 14 years as the district's supervisor.

Carvalho's time at LAUSD has included a number of wins for the district, including gains in test scores and participation in AP classes.

After threatening to sever ties with Scouting America and kick the youth group off military bases worldwide, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Friday gave a six-month reprieve to the organization formerly known as the Boy Scouts of America.

Hegseth made the announcement in a video posted to X, framing it as an ultimatum to Scouting to conform to the Trump administration's anti-DEI agenda. He detailed his many criticisms of the group, saying Scouts had "lost their way" by changing the organization's name and "watering down" what he called "the focus on God as the ruler of the universe."

He accused the Scouts of promoting "an insidious, radical, woke ideology that is anti-America and anti-American."

Hegseth also made clear he thinks the organization should go back to being exclusively male. " Ideally, I believe the Boy Scouts should go back to being the Boy Scouts as originally founded, a group that develops boys into men," he said. "Maybe someday."

The Pentagon's promise to reevaluate its relationship with Scouting in six months was nonetheless a retreat of sorts for Hegseth. Today's announcement came after word of Hegseth's plans to shun Scouting sparked weeks of backlash, including from some Republicans. Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska has said of Hegseth's plans: "I've heard a lot of dumb stuff, but this is up there."

In a meeting with Scouting officials in January, Hegseth had demanded that the organization change its name back to Boy Scouts and remove some 200,000 young girls from its membership.

" I knew in the meeting that my board, my organization, was not gonna make those changes," Scouting America CEO Roger Krone said in an interview with NPR.

Krone explained that the organization considers including girls to be a service to families.

" When I was a youth, we left parts of the family in the parking lot on Friday night when we went camping," Krone said. "Long before I came back to Scouting, our board made several decisions, by a vote of our national council, that we were gonna serve the entire family."

A week after the Pentagon meeting, Scouting officials sent a letter to Hegseth outlining proposed concessions. While they wouldn't change the name or kick out girls, they would drop a Citizenship in Society merit badge that promoted diversity and had been instituted after the killing of George Floyd. They would also add a Military Service merit badge, waive membership fees for military families and offer a public rededication "of duty to God, duty to country, and service."

Even after the concessions, which Scouting officials said they planned to implement regardless, a spokesman told NPR the group expected an announcement from the Pentagon severing ties was imminent. But after NPR reported on the rift, Krone said Scouting's members and alumni started lobbying against breaking the century-old partnership.

Hegseth has for years criticized Scouting for allegedly caving to progressive politics. He repeated the claim Friday. "Scouting became an organization that no longer supported and celebrated boys," Hegseth said. "They even welcomed the destructive myth of gender fluidity and transgenderism to infiltrate their membership."

The Secretary also highlighted another concession. "Scouting America will modify its policy to make clear that membership will be based solely on biological sex at birth and not gender identity," he said. "That means that the application, any application, will have only two sex designations, male and female, and the application must match the applicant's birth certificate."

Krone noted that the Scouting application already has only two sex designations. " Tomorrow it will be the same application that we had yesterday," he said. "We ask for that information so we can operate our units in a way that ensures that our kids are safe and are safeguarded."

In the wake of sexual abuse allegations that resulted in a $2.46 billion victim compensation fund, Krone says Scouting has implemented stringent policies. Along with other practices, he said they ask for gender information " so that we know from a tenting standpoint and from a bathroom standpoint how to run our programs."

Severing ties with Scouts would have meant banning scouts from meeting on military bases, withdrawing military medical and logistical assistance to the quadrennial Scout Jamboree and eliminating the program that allows Eagle Scouts to enlist at advanced rank and pay.

As reported by NPR, the Pentagon had gone so far as to coordinate with the heads of the different branches on what a separation might mean. The Pentagon circulated a draft notification internally meant for the congressional Armed Services Committees, justifying the withdrawal of military support for the Jamboree. The memo, reviewed by NPR, claimed that providing medical and logistical help to the campout, scheduled for July, would threaten national security.

With this six-month trial period, base access for Scout troops will continue and Jamboree assistance is moving forward for now, including recruitment coordination. As Hegseth pointed out on X, many boy Scouts have become high-ranking military officers, or have served the country in other ways.

"Six Boy Scouts have been elected president of the United States," Hegseth said. "Eleven of the 12 Men to walk on the Moon [were] boy Scouts."

Copyright 2026 NPR

A city commission on Thursday recommended increasing the size of the Los Angeles City Council from 15 to 25, a change long sought after by advocates who said the panel was too small for a city of nearly 4 million people.

The Charter Reform Commission also recommended moving to a ranked-choice voting system for city elections, a method in which voters choose multiple candidates in order of their preference. If no candidate wins a majority of votes, then the last-place finisher is eliminated and their supporters' second choice is counted.

Each of those moves would require changing the city’s charter, the basic set of rules and procedures by which the city operates. And any change to the charter would require voter approval.

The recommendations will go to the City Council, which will decide whether to place the proposals on the June ballot.

Born out of corruption

The commission has been meeting for six months to take input from the public and to consider charter changes. It was created in the wake of the 2022 City Hall tapes scandal, where members of the council were heard on audio discussing how to hold onto power. The conversation was laced with crude and racist remarks, triggering calls for resignation and reforms.

Council President Nury Martinez resigned.

Expanding the size of the council has been suggested as one way to help guard against corruption in local government. Supporters say making the council larger would make it better reflect the diversity of L.A.

The idea is “to have a city council that is bigger, more representative of Los Angeles and gives minorities across the city [power] to elect candidates of choice,” Commissioner Diego Andrades said at the meeting.

Several other major cities have far larger councils. New York, with 8 million people, has a 51-member City Council. Chicago, with 2.7 million residents, has a 50-member council.

The current size of the Los Angeles City Council was established nearly a century ago, when Angelenos approved the 1924 Charter. At the time, each of the 15 council members represented on average a little more than 38,000 residents.

Today, the city has grown to more than 3.9 million residents, with each councilmember now representing on average 265,000 Angelenos, according to Fair Rep LA, an advocacy group.

Increasing the size of the L.A. council to 25 would mean each member would represent 159,000 residents each.

Commissioners debated increasing the size to 29, but voted down that number amid concerns the voters would reject it as too high.

A new way of voting

The committee made several other reform recommendations during a five-hour meeting Thursday evening. The panel recommended that the city change the way it conducts elections, moving to a ranked-choice voting system for city elections starting in 2032.

With ranked-choice voting, if a candidate receives more than half of the first choices, that candidate wins outright — just like in any other election.

But if there is no majority winner after counting the first choices, the race is decided by an instant runoff. The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and candidates who ranked that candidate as their first choice will have their votes counted for their second choice. The process continues until one candidate has a majority of the vote.

New York conducts ranked-choice elections.

“The Charter Commission took a big step in empowering Los Angeles voters,” said Michael Feinstein, a former mayor of Santa Monica and a Green Party candidate for secretary of state.

“Ranked-choice voting allows voters to express their preferences over more than one candidate, it gets rid of the spoiler issue and gives voters a much greater voice,” he said. It also saves money because the city is required to conduct one election instead of a primary and runoff elections.

The commission also recommended the city create a chief financial officer position to replace the chief administrative officer position.

City Controller Kenneth Mejia disagreed with the recommendation, saying the CFO role should be placed in his office.

The panel also voted against giving the controller the ability to hire outside counsel and turned down Mejia’s request that the controller be able to conduct audits of all city programs, including those under elected offices.

The commission voted to recommend giving the controller a fixed budget that is a percentage of the general fund. It also agreed to recommend enshrining in the charter the controller’s waste fraud and abuse functions — something that was requested by Mejia.

Earlier this week, the panel approved bifurcating the City Attorney’s Office, creating an anti-corruption office and doubling the charter-mandated amount of funds set aside for the city parks.