The Brief

Jaz Roche, also known to nearly 11,000 Tiktok followers as @spo0kymom, hawks facial cleansing bars, baby wagons and AI tools in short social media videos.

On a website where clients can pay her to post videos about their products, she says she’s based in Pennsylvania. Yet the content creator has taken an interest in the California governor’s race lately.

Tiktok and Instagram accounts linked to Roche have posted 34 times in the past 10 days to boost the campaign of billionaire Tom Steyer or to criticize his main Democratic opponent, Xavier Becerra.

“Hear me out, I have something to admit,” she says in the first video, posted May 8, on an account where she describes herself as a “so-cal girlypop.” “I did not expect the most progressive governor candidate to be a billionaire. But look at the policies, you guys.”

What she didn’t say was that Steyer’s campaign is paying her to say it.

Steyer, who has poured nearly $200 million into the most expensive primary campaign in state history, is under scrutiny for using paid social media influencers to post favorable things about him.

Is that legal?

Gov. Gavin Newsom three years ago signed a law meant to bring transparency to the increasingly intertwined world of politics and content creators, enacting a law requiring influencers to be upfront in their posts about being paid by a political campaign. In one of the first tests of the law, regulators have opened an investigation into one of the Steyer influencer videos.

But experts and transparency advocates aren’t optimistic: The law was intentionally designed with no real penalties, and the agency responsible for enforcing it sometimes takes years to resolve investigations.

“This is where the ‘Wild West’ analogy becomes useful,” said Dan Schnur, a political science professor and former chair of the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission.

‘Inundate the internet’

Campaign finance filings from January through April 18 show Steyer has paid over $123,400 to at least eight influencers. The New York Times reported that includes $100,000 to Texas-based Latino mega-influencer Carlos Eduardo Espina, whose 14.3 million Tiktok followers are a coveted target for Democrats and who has endorsed Steyer.

The campaign is also paying over $870,000 to a digital media agency, Group Project Digital, that solicits creators to post daily videos about Steyer. The listing initially offered $10 per video; it was amended last week to offer $1,000 a month and now includes a sentence telling creators they need to disclose the payments.

The state investigation covers just one of the influencer videos, in which content creator Isaiah Washington (known as @zaydante) did not disclose that Steyer’s campaign paid him $10,000 for a now-deleted video. It was sparked by a complaint from a pair of political social media influencers who post frequently in support of Becerra. On Tuesday, they filed another complaint alleging numerous additional paid, undisclosed posts, including from accounts in other countries.

“What he’s done is inundate the Internet in every way, shape and form to try and create an echo chamber,” said Beatrice Gomberg, one of the complainants.

Among the accounts they’ve recently highlighted: @foosgonewild, which has posted memes, content about Southern California street culture and, on May 5, an interview with Steyer talking about his opposition to ICE. The account has 3.3 million followers on Instagram and 1 million on Tiktok.

The Tiktok video has no disclosures. On Instagram, at the bottom of the video description, the account notes it’s a partner with California-based social video firm Flighthouse. Neither the content creator nor Flighthouse responded to requests for comment. The Steyer campaign would not disclose how much it paid the firm.

Steyer has defended soliciting influencers, saying they deserve to be paid for their work.

Spokesperson Kevin Liao called Gomberg’s first complaint “baseless” and said the campaign specified in its contracts with all third-party content firms that they needed to include payment disclosures, satisfying the campaign’s legal obligations under the state transparency law. The campaign doesn’t review posts in advance, he said.

Asked why the campaign had paid some creators who don’t live in California, he said, “I don’t see why that’s an issue.”

“Content creators, wherever they’re based, have followers in California,” he said.

‘Politics is all content now’

The blowback reveals the rising power and profitability of content creators in politics. One in five Americans regularly gets news on TikTok, rising to more than two in five for those under age 30. With traditional television hemorrhaging viewership and Americans hooked on the infinite scroll, campaigns are increasingly chasing posts.

They regularly hold events to court paid and unpaid influencers and sit for video interviews, aided by a new crop of talent agencies and digital media firms that represent influencers and solicit their content.

The relationship has contributed to at least one politician’s downfall: After attending a creator meeting for then-gubernatorial hopeful Eric Swalwell last fall, political influencer Arielle Fodor (aka @mrs.frazzled) received a flurry of messages warning her to stay away from him. It prompted her to post videos discussing rumors of his sexual misconduct, she has said. He quit the race after reporters covered several allegations of harassment and assault.

“Politics is all content now,” said Alex Stack, a Democratic consultant and former communications staffer for Gov. Gavin Newsom. “Candidates need to be content creators and they need a little online army behind them to get traction.”

Roche’s videos about Steyer — some featuring her talking, some simply showing text praising Steyer over mundane videos of her life — have gotten no more than 1,100 views each. They’re posted on accounts with fewer than two dozen followers, a far cry from the millions of Californians Steyer’s TV ad spending blitz is reaching.

But they provide something critical for the billionaire candidate who’s funding his own campaign: the impression of grassroots support.

In a briefing memo for creators obtained by CalMatters, the campaign’s digital firm tells Tiktokers and Instagrammers that the “title of billionaire is his biggest sticking point,” and that the campaign wants to reach California women, Latinos and African Americans. The Sacramento Bee first reported on the memo.

Organic content?

Advertisers covet creators regardless of audience size for their ability to portray a product endorsement as an organic recommendation from a friend. Candidates courting voters are no different.

For example, an organization representing California lawyers is paying influencers to promote a ballot measure targeting Uber's responsibility for sexual assaults by its drivers. Matt Mahan’s campaign for governor has also paid influencers and meme accounts for content boosting him. Instagram users see disclosures on those videos’ descriptions.

In the Los Angeles mayor’s race, Karen Bass’ challenger Spencer Pratt is offering money on social media gig platforms to make videos featuring viral-friendly soundbites of him.

Serabeth Mullaney, a part-time San Francisco content creator promoting cat treats and AI tools, turned down an offer to make videos boosting Steyer’s campaign because of her opposition to billionaires in politics. The 29-year-old said she gets most of her news from social media so she’s concerned about the seep of paid political ads into influencer content.

“Anyone desperate to make that (money), they’re going to do the campaign,” she said. “Whether or not they believe in Tom Steyer, they’re going to post those videos.”

The concern mirrors the state Fair Political Practices Commission’s rationale for proposing the 2024 transparency law. Before that, campaigns only needed to disclose payment for ads they posted directly; paid content on third-party platforms was largely unregulated.

But the agency primarily relies on complaints to launch investigations, and violations of the law come with few consequences — no fines or criminal charges for creators or campaigns. The only thing the agency can do is ask a court to force an influencer to disclose payments, but experts say that's an expensive and time-consuming effort for a fleeting video.

Sen. Tom Umberg, a Santa Ana Democrat who authored the law, said paid influencers in politics are more prevalent than three years ago and lawmakers should make the requirements more enforceable.

“Transparency is like whack-a-mole,” Umberg said. “Every year there’s a new modality, and so there’s a new way to get around stuff.”

Becerra's online army

Now the gubernatorial candidates and their supporters are engaged in a mass scrutiny of all the posts boosting each others’ campaigns.

Critics have also questioned the relationship between Becerra and numerous creators who have boosted his campaign since Swalwell dropped out. The Becerra campaign has insisted it has never paid any content creator for a post.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra on April 1, 2026.

(

Larry Valenzuela

/

CalMatters

)

The campaign seeks relationships with creators who are willing to post for free as a blend of campaign volunteer and reporter, said digital strategist Alf Lamont.

“Paid influencer campaigns don’t carry the kind of punch that organizing does,” Lamont said. “We want to make sure we’re getting folks who truly believe in it so we don’t face the second-guesses and the ‘paid by’ and the feeling you’re looking at something that’s insincere.”

Jordan “Jay” Gonzalez’s posts included lifestyle content, Latino advocacy and even salmon DNA facials before he started creating pro-Becerra videos on multiple platforms in March, a month before the campaign hired him as a full-time social media strategist. Gonzalez has recently been amending his posts with disclosures that he is paid by the campaign, “out of extreme caution so as not to seem disingenuous to my audience.”

Opponents point out Gonzalez and another creator who has posted numerous times in Becerra’s favor, Maggie Reed or @mermaidmamamaggie, have previously charged for content. Antonio Villaraigosa’s campaign solicited unpaid videos from both of them in the spring, and received quotes from each influencer’s agent of $7,000 to $16,500, emails shared with CalMatters show. The Villaraigosa campaign confirmed the exchanges.

On Tuesday, Steyer’s campaign filed a complaint alleging both influencers’ videos were paid for by Becerra’s campaign with no disclosure.

Becerra’s campaign has not reported any payments to Reed in campaign finance filings, and Lamont denied paying either creator for content. Gonzalez, in an email, said that he had previously declined a paid offer from the Villaraigosa campaign. Reed did not respond to a request for comment.

‘A SoCal girl’

Gomberg and Kaitlyn Hennessy, friends who met at a Becerra rally, have both posted frequently in favor of his campaign — for free, they say.

The pair began sleuthing online in early May, eventually filing a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission last week alleging Steyer’s campaign hired Roche, Washington and several other content creators to post on his behalf without disclosing it.

Posing as another, unnamed campaign, they emailed creators offering paid political content work to prompt them to talk about posting for Steyer’s campaign.

One account, @isabel.speakss, purported to belong to a “so cal girl sharing her thoughts” named Isabel Mendoza and has exclusively posted about Steyer since May 9. The woman in the videos appears identical to Jade Johnson, a Florida-based influencer.

Another account, @jess.votes, is linked to another Florida content creator.

Since the complaint was filed, Roche and the other creators have included disclaimers in their posts. None of them responded to inquiries from CalMatters asking if they knew about the campaign disclosure law. After a CalMatters reporter asked Johnson whether she was asked to pose as a California voter, the @isabel.speakss account on Monday afternoon removed the “so cal” description from its profile.

None of those creators are listed in Steyer’s latest campaign finance filings as subcontractors of any digital strategy firm. Steyer spokesperson Liao said they will appear in the next filing.

CalMatters reached out to all the creators listed in the filings; none agreed to an interview. They include lifestyle influencers, comedians and musicians whom Steyer paid between $1,500 and $10,000, mostly through another firm, to post video interviews with Steyer or talk about his platform. One of them labeled her video a “paid partnership;” others did not disclose campaign payments or have since deleted their videos.

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

This story first appeared on Long Beach Post.

An off-duty Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputy died in a motorcycle crash near Marina Pacifica on Friday.

The crash happened at about 11 p.m. at the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Second Street, according to Long Beach police.

Martin Maciel, 40, was heading south on PCH when he collided with a vehicle traveling east on Second Street, throwing the rider from the motorcycle, police said. He was pronounced dead at the scene, according to the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner’s Office.

The other vehicle’s driver remained at the scene and cooperated with investigators, who believe speed was a contributing factor in the crash. Police did not specify which driver they suspect was speeding.

The Sheriff’s Department said Maciel was a 10-year veteran of the force and an Army Reservist. He worked at the Norwalk Station as a motorcycle deputy after starting his career at the Twin Towers Correctional Facility and working patrol at the Transit Services Bureau.

“Throughout his years of service, Deputy Maciel was a valued member of the department, and his dedication will be remembered by those who had the privilege of serving alongside him,” the Sheriff’s Department said in a statement. “Our thoughts and prayers are with his family, friends, and all who knew him.”

In recent years, Long Beach has been fighting a stubborn rise in traffic deaths. Last year, the city recorded 53 fatal crashes, its highest total in more than a decade.

Friday’s crash marked the city’s 41st fatal traffic collision this year. At this time last year, Long Beach had recorded 43 fatal crashes.

To fight speeding in particular, Long Beach recently installed automated speed cameras that are scheduled to start issuing tickets in December.

Inflation-scarred consumers are finding a bit of relief these days at an unlikely place: the gas pump.

The average price of gasoline dipped below $4 a gallon Tuesday for the first time in three months, according to AAA. The price of regular gas has fallen by 38 cents in the last month to a national average of $3.98.

The overall cost of living, however, remains stubbornly high. Consumer prices in October were up 0.4% from the previous month, according to a report Tuesday from the Labor Department. That's a bigger monthly increase than forecasters had expected.

Rising housing costs accounted for about a third of the monthly increase. Grocery prices were also up sharply during the month.

Why gas prices are falling

The drop in gasoline prices in recent weeks is thanks to a combination of falling crude oil prices, refineries' switch to a cheaper blend of winter fuel, and the typical seasonal drop in demand for gas.

"Temperatures are getting colder," says Patrick De Haan, petroleum analyst for GasBuddy. "People who have boats and RVs are probably done for the year. I would say, by Thanksgiving, so long as we don't get any wild cards geopolitically, the national average could be $3.75 a gallon."

Gas prices are still at a record high for this time of year, however — about a dollar a gallon higher than when the U.S. went to war with Iran. Even with the recent drop in prices, this year's drive to grandma's for Thanksgiving could be the most expensive ever.

Diesel prices have also fallen, but more slowly than gas prices. AAA says the average price of diesel fuel is $6.15 a gallon, down about 13 cents from a month ago.

The high cost of diesel fuel is another byproduct of the war — not only the U.S. war with Iran but also Russia's war with Ukraine. Russia is ordinarily a big exporter of diesel fuel, but that supply has largely dried up because of damage to Russia's refineries.

"When a country like Russia isn't exporting diesel, that is very impactful for the global market. So diesel prices – they will come down but they will still remain very elevated," De Haan says.

Heating oil prices are also high

Rising diesel prices are also driving up the cost of heating oil in the northeast, because heating oil is a close cousin of diesel.

Mild fall weather has kept heating costs in check so far, but De Haan says a blast of cold air could push heating oil prices even higher.

Higher diesel prices also affect the cost of other goods that have to be moved by truck or train or cargo ship.

"You're starting to see higher freight costs get passed through," says economist Mike Reid of RBC Capital Markets. "We've seen it show up notably in goods that are heavily imported — apparel, recreation goods, IT equipment."

In a speech Tuesday before the inflation release, Federal Reserve Chris Waller suggested that energy shocks could have more lasting effects on inflation that previously though. Waller suggested the central bank may need to raise interest rates more aggressively to curb price hikes than markets had previously expected.

No annual comparison for inflation this time

While Tuesday's inflation report shows how much prices rose in the last month, it does not include the typical reading on how prices have changed over the last year. That's a casualty of last year's government shutdown, which idled hundreds of government price-checkers so prices from October 2025 were never recorded for comparison.

The Cleveland Federal Reserve Bank estimated before Tuesday's release that consumer prices in October were up 3.7% from a year ago. That would outstrip average wage gains of just 3.1% during the year, so the typical worker is losing buying power. That's a big reason for the heavy turnout in last week's mid-term elections. 49.1% of eligible voters took part in the election, the second highest total for any midterm in more than a century.

Copyright 2026 NPR

California will not become the first state to levy a wealth tax on its richest residents — at least not this election.

Voters rejected Proposition 40, a proposal to tax billionaires based on their net worth and financial holdings, by 52.8% to 47.2%, according to The Associated Press Monday. The measure had trailed behind for days before The Associated Press confirmed results.

Leaders for Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, the union pushing the measure, seemed to concede the race minutes before the polls closed but vowed to try again in 2028 if California’s Legislature “fails to deliver a real solution” to fund healthcare hammered by recent federal law.

“That’s not a hypothetical. That’s our plan,” said Dave Regan, president of SEIU-UHW.

Election Day was projected to be an all-around defeat for the union, known for aggressively pursuing ballot measures. Voters defeated union-backed Proposition 44, an effort to control how clinics spend money. Proposition 42, a billionaire tax countermeasure prohibiting future wealth taxes, was leading Monday evening by 51.6% to 48.4%. That measure could get in the way of SEIU-UHW’s future plans to try taxing wealth again.

The billionaire tax would have generated $100 billion for healthcare and education through a one-time, 5% tax on billionaires, according to SEIU-UHW. Opponents of the measure celebrated its defeat.

“Proposition 40 was a reckless experiment conducted on our state’s economy with little regard for the harms it would cause,” according to a statement from Evan Westrop, a campaign strategist for No on Prop. 40.

The opposition campaign, which was backed by wealthy tech investors and healthcare organizations, argued the measure had already driven billionaires from the state and permanently harmed income tax revenue. On Monday they said the state still faces “enormous pressure” to find other ways to fund healthcare hit by federal cuts.

Billionaire tax divided Democrats

From the outset, Prop. 40 revealed divisions among the Democratic Party and galvanized some of Silicon Valley’s wealthiest executives to spend hundreds of millions to defeat it.

Gov. Gavin Newsom became one of its earliest opponents, attempting through backroom negotiations to keep it off of the ballot altogether. He endorsed the billionaire-backed counter measure, Prop. 42, designed to ban all wealth taxes in California and kill Prop. 40. Newsom, along with Democratic allies such as Planned Parenthood of California and California Teachers Association, argued a one-time tax would not solve the state’s fiscal woes and would drive wealthy residents out of state.

The California Democratic Party and California Federation of Labor Unions supported the initiative and opposed its counter measures, arguing the state needed more revenue to shield workers and everyday Californians from the effects of dramatic federal healthcare cuts expected to kick 2 million residents off of health insurance.

Lorena Gonzalez, former Assemblymember and president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, said Prop. 40’s failure puts even more pressure on state and federal lawmakers to backfill federal Medicaid cuts.

Supporters of Prop. 40 blamed its loss on billionaires vastly outspending the Yes campaign, which raised $33.5 million.

“That is incredibly corrosive and corrupting to our democracy and our political system, and that's been dominating the discussion here in California,” Regan said.

Billionaires poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the campaign to stop Prop. 40. Google co-founder Sergey Brin led the charge, publicly moving out of state and donating $102 million to Building a Better California, a political committee he founded to oppose the tax. The group has served as a passthrough for other billionaire donors to oppose Prop. 40, including by funding the counterpropositions 41 and 42. Collectively, ultra-wealthy opponents donated $378.4 million to oppose the billionaire tax.

In a statement, Abby Lunardini, a spokesperson for Building a Better California, said the billionaire tax threatened to limit revenue for all services in California, including healthcare, by driving economic interests out of the state.

“It was a lose-lose for California, and voters clearly agreed,” Lunardini said.

Ultimately, opponents’ efforts succeeded.

Polling just ahead of the election indicated falling support for Prop. 40 despite growing sentiment for taxing billionaires more in general. According to a UC Berkeley Citrin-POLITICO poll, 45% of voters believed in taxing billionaires more to fund public services compared to 35% who believed the state should prioritize keeping billionaires in state because of the tax revenue and jobs they generate — but just 46% favored Prop. 40.

Infighting among Democrats could have also contributed to Prop. 40’s demise, said John Matsusaka, an economist and direct democracy expert at USC, ahead of the election. Research shows money doesn’t buy people’s votes or values on core issues like abortion, Matsusaka said, but it can exploit uncertainty.

“People these days are very tribal. When your tribe is arguing, people start to listen to the counterarguments,” Matsusaka said.

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

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

After an hourslong, late-night standoff between Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and community members outside Adventist Health White Memorial over the weekend, local leaders are demanding answers from hospital leadership. 

The hospital has previously faced scrutiny over claims that its administrators have allowed federal immigration agents to interfere in patient care. 

On Saturday, state Sen. María Elena Durazo marched with community members from Mariachi Plaza to the hospital to hand-deliver a letter to White Memorial President Daniel Fontoura. The letter, signed by elected officials and community leaders, calls for an end to any collaboration that may exist between the hospital and federal immigration agents. 

The night before, ICE agents clashed with protesters near the hospital and blocked the hospital’s ambulance entrance. According to White Memorial, ambulances were diverted for about two hours during the incident. Two U.S. citizens were also detained by federal agents. 

Federal immigration agents were at White Memorial Friday night because someone in their custody had been taken to the emergency room, according to hospital officials and the Los Angeles Police Department. 

“What happened last night was unacceptable,” Durazo told Fontoura in the parking lot of White Memorial, steps away from where ICE agents had been standing shoulder to shoulder just hours earlier. “It’s unacceptable that ICE would go into our healthcare facilities. But we also believe that White Memorial can and should do more.”

Fontoura told the group that the hospital has “no special relationship, no special contract” with ICE. “When they show up, they show up,” Fontoura said, referring to the federal agents. 

Fontoura said hospital staff took care of the person who was brought in by ICE and claimed they denied the agents’ request to “break protocol” and be in the same room as the patient and their physician. “We said no,” Fontoura said. 

Boyle Heights Beat asked White Memorial whether these privacy protections are standard practice and whether federal agents follow them while at the hospital. The hospital did not respond before publication. 

Last year, Adventist Health released a six-point statement outlining its policies to protect detained patients and support staff, but doctors and advocates at the time said it was not enough. 

Now Durazo and others are calling for more accountability and stricter guidelines from the hospital on how they respond to ICE activity. 

The letter requests a written response from hospital leadership by Nov. 21. It is signed by Durazo, Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez, Mayor-elect Nithya Raman, Councilmember Ysabel Jurado and other community leaders from Proyecto Pastoral, CHIRLA and more.

White Memorial has not responded to Boyle Heights Beat’s request for comment on the letter.

If the concerns remain unresolved, those who signed the letter say they will ask the California attorney general to review White Memorial’s compliance with state law.

“For ICE to show up the way they did, it takes a much higher level of consciousness and determination by the hospital to stop them from doing this,” Durazo told Boyle Heights Beat after the rally on Saturday. “We don’t have absolute power over ICE, we know that, but we do have some power over ICE.”