The Brief

Law enforcement unions and real estate interests are teaming up to fund an expensive campaign to defeat incumbent Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón and elect his challenger Nathan Hochman, a former federal prosecutor and criminal defense attorney who has promised to undo Gascón’s progressive policies.

The numbers dwarf the amount of spending on Gascón’s behalf, a reversal from four years ago when criminal justice reformers from around the country flooded his campaign coffers with money and lifted the one-time cop-turned-reformer to victory.

Gascón is the nation’s most prominent progressive prosecutor and the results of the race may be a bellwether for the criminal justice reform movement nationwide.

Much of the money is going to campaign ads that feature a dystopian L.A. rife with crime and homelessness and that blame Gascón for the problems — unfairly, according to his supporters and criminologists.

Outside committees working to help elect Hochman have raised more than $7.2 million compared to $605,000 for Gascón, according to an analysis conducted by LAist.

A coalition led by the labor union that represents L.A. County sheriff’s deputies leads the way with $1.35 million in contributions to back Hochman.

“This has turned into our most important race in the county,” said Derek Hsieh, executive director of the Association of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs. The association also represents district attorney investigators.

“It feels out of control on the streets to first responders,” Hsieh said.

Gascón’s supporters say they have hope despite the outsized spending for Hochman.

“It's still a relatively unknown office and both candidates are relatively unknown,” said the Rev. Zachary Hoover, who leads LA Voice Action, a multi-faith community organization.

He added Hochman would take the office “backward toward tough on crime” policies that harm people of color and poor people.

Who are the donors?

Gascón's agenda includes reducing mass incarceration by shortening prison time for people convicted of non-violent crimes and seeking early release for some people who are already locked up and deemed to not be a danger to the public. And those are some of the reasons why police unions from around L.A. County and beyond are spending to oust him.

The Sacramento-based California Correctional Peace Officers Association — the union that represents state prison guards — has poured in $500,000.

Gascón is also getting opposition within his own office. The union that represents frontline prosecutors who work for Gascón contributed $60,000 to the effort to defeat him in November. The union has been among the district attorney’s sharpest critics — over what some say are his heavy-handed management style as well as his policies.

Longtime Republican donor Gerald Marcil tops real estate interests spending to defeat Gascón. He donated $450,000. Marcil heads Palos Verdes Investments, which owns apartment complexes around L.A.

“This election has the biggest effect on the quality of life in L.A. County of any of the other elections,” Marcil said of the district attorney race. He is joined in six-figure donations by Douglas Emmett Properties and Kilroy Realty.

Billionaire developer Rick Caruso, who built and owns The Grove and The Americana malls, has contributed $250,000 to bounce Gascón. He said the D.A. is to blame for the crime rate.

Violent crime went up 7% in 2023 from 2020 in L.A., the year Gascon took office, according to the state Department of Justice. More recently, violent crime has been trending downward.

Property crime jumped 20% during the same time frame and continues to rise.

But there are two big caveats. One is COVID. Crime jumped dramatically during the pandemic.

The other is the fact that these are crime trends we’ve seen across the country — in big cities with and without progressive prosecutors.

“People feel uncomfortable in neighborhoods all around Los Angeles,” said Caruso, who ran for L.A. mayor in 2022.

One expert agreed that people feel uncomfortable about crime, but was unwilling to blame Gascón for the crime rate.

“I think that district attorneys, who have a lot of power over individual outcomes, have a much smaller influence on the overall crime rate relative to police,” said Emily Owens, who chairs the criminology department at U.C. Irvine.

She noted the crime rate is relatively low, compared to previous decades, and argued that some of the fear is “based on one or two news stories that whip people up.”

A different politicial environment

Police and real estate interests opposed Gascón when he first ran for office. The difference this time is that support for Gascón is lagging — especially after his weak performance in the primary when he finished first but with only 25% of the vote.

Gascón was elected on a progressive agenda in a year that saw the murder of George Floyd by police in Minneapolis and widespread street protests calling for criminal justice reform nationally.

Gascón attracted support from around the country. George Soros alone contributed $2.25 million. This year, Soros is sitting out.

Soros spokesperson Michael Vachon said Soros’ attention is focused on the presidential contest.

“This reflects the unprecedented stakes facing the nation and should not be misconstrued as an abandonment of Gascòn or other local leaders who are implementing effective and humane approaches to public safety,” Vachon said in a statement. “Los Angeles County District Attorney Gascòn has George Soros’ endorsement."

'An uphill battle' for Gascón

In a poll released earlier this month, Gascón trailed Hochman by a significant margin. The survey from the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by the Los Angeles Times, found 51% of likely voters favored Hochman and 21% backed Gascón. Twenty-eight percent were undecided.

“Even the most principled of political donors are essentially investors when it comes right down to it,” said Dan Schnur, who teaches political communications at the University of Southern California and UC Berkeley. “If they don’t see that investment as having a likelihood of paying off, they don’t make it.”

When Gascón ran for district attorney four years ago, that was at a “singular moment” for the reform movement, Schnur said.

“Voters were much more willing to explore reform efforts and it's not like they’ve turned their back on those efforts but they are just a lot more cautious than they were four years ago,” he said.

Individually, Gascón has also raised far less than Hochman. Gascón has raised about $870,000 to Hochman’s $4.6 million.

Supporters of Gascón remain confident they can overcome the deficit in the polls.

“There’s a huge number of undecideds,” said Hoover, from LA Voice Action.

A coalition led by Hoover’s group has raised $605,000 to support Gascón. Half the money comes from the Progressive Era PAC. Bay Area criminal justice reform advocate Quinn Delaney, the Smart Justice California Action Fund and SEIU 2015 have kicked in $100,000 each.

Hoover called the race “an uphill battle” for Gascón.

“I’m a man of faith, so I try to practice hopefulness,” he added.

LAist data journalist Maloy Moore contributed to this story.

This on-and-off rain is looking like good news ... for wildflower lovers.

We talked to Katie Tilford, our go-to wildflowers expert at the Theodore Payne Foundation here in L.A., which is dedicated to native plants and wildflowers in Southern California.

And she is holding out hope the rains this week and next will be just what we need to see California poppies and more bloom big in the upcoming weeks.

"A little more rain would be nice," she said, "Then I think we’ll have a really good bloom this year. Either way, I think there’s going to be some flowers for sure … but a little more rain would really just kick things up a notch.”

And as for the question we always ask this time of year … will it be a superbloom kind of year?

Only Mother Nature knows for sure. We plant nerds also know that that the term superbloom gets thrown around with regularity during wildflower season, even though it refers to very specific conditions created by a potent cocktail of early rains, cool temps, hot temps, and late rains. So, we repeat: Stay tuned.

But Tilford says she’s already seeing signs there will be plenty of wildflowers to enjoy in the coming weeks, so you might want to make a plan to get out there.

One surefire spot: the Antelope Valley California Poppy Reserve, when the poppies hit full bloom. There is a live cam to help you time your trip for the best blooms.

Another great resource is also the wildflower hotline hosted by Theodore Payne. Starting in March, it will be updated each Friday with the latest wildflower news and tips on where to see it all. Call: 818 768-1802, Ext. 7. 

An annual meeting of the nation's governors that has long served as a rare bipartisan gathering is unraveling after President Donald Trump excluded Democratic governors from White House events.

The National Governors Association said it will no longer hold a formal meeting with Trump when governors are scheduled to convene in Washington later this month, after the White House planned to invite only Republican governors. On Tuesday, 18 Democratic governors also announced they would boycott a traditional dinner at the White House.

"If the reports are true that not all governors are invited to these events, which have historically been productive and bipartisan opportunities for collaboration, we will not be attending the White House dinner this year," the Democrats wrote. "Democratic governors remain united and will never stop fighting to protect and make life better for people in our states."

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican who chairs the NGA, told fellow governors in a letter on Monday that the White House intended to limit invitations to the association's annual business meeting, scheduled for Feb. 20, to Republican governors only.

"Because NGA's mission is to represent all 55 governors, the Association is no longer serving as the facilitator for that event, and it is no longer included in our official program," Stitt wrote in the letter, which was obtained by The Associated Press.

The governors' group, which is scheduled to meet from Feb. 19-21, is one of the few remaining venues where political leaders from both major parties gather to discuss the top issues facing their communities. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Tuesday that Trump has "discretion to invite anyone he wants to the White House."

"It's the people's house," she said. "It's also the president's home, so he can invite whomever he wants to dinners and events here at the White House."

Representatives for Sitt and the NGA didn't comment on the letter. Brandon Tatum, the NGA's CEO, said in a statement last week that the White House meeting is an "important tradition" and said the organization was "disappointed in the administration's decision to make it a partisan occasion this year."

In his letter to other governors, Stitt encouraged the group to unite around common goals.

"We cannot allow one divisive action to achieve its goal of dividing us," he wrote. "The solution is not to respond in kind, but to rise above and to remain focused on our shared duty to the people we serve. America's governors have always been models of pragmatic leadership, and that example is most important when Washington grows distracted by politics."

Signs of partisan tensions emerged at the White House meeting last year, when Trump and Maine's Gov. Janet Mills traded barbs.

Trump singled out the Democratic governor over his push to bar transgender athletes from competing in girls' and women's sports, threatening to withhold federal funding from the state if she did not comply. Mills responded, "We'll see you in court."

Trump then predicted that Mills' political career would be over for opposing the order. She is now running for U.S. Senate.

The back-and-forth had a lasting impact on last year's conference and some Democratic governors did not renew their dues last year to the bipartisan group.
Copyright 2026 NPR

A booming industry that charges veterans for help in obtaining the benefits they earned through military service must shut down or dramatically change its business model in California by the end of the year under a new law Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Tuesday.

The law prohibits unaccredited private companies from billing former military service members for help with their Department of Veterans Affairs claims.

Technically, it was already illegal under federal law to charge veterans for that work, but Congress 20 years ago removed criminal penalties for violations, and scores of private companies emerged, offering to speed up and maximize benefit claims.

“We owe our veteran community a debt of gratitude — for their years of service and sacrifice," Newsom said in a written statement. "By signing this bill into law, we are ensuring veterans and service members get to keep more money in their pockets, and not line the coffers of predatory actors. We are closing this federal fraud loophole for good.”

Critics call the private companies “claim sharks” because their fees are often five times the monthly benefit increase veterans obtain after using their services. CalMatters in September, for instance, interviewed a Vietnam-era veteran who was billed $5,500 after receiving benefits that would pay him $1,100 a month.

Depending on a disability rating, a claim consulting fee under that model could easily hit $10,000 or more.

“We owe it to our veterans to stand with them and to protect them from being taken advantage of while navigating the benefits they've earned,” said Sen. Bob Archuleta, a Democrat representing Norwalk. Archuleta, a former Army officer, carried the legislation. “This is not about politics; it's about doing what's right. Making millions of dollars on the back of our veterans is wrong. They've earned their benefits. They deserve their benefits.”

California’s new law is part of a tug-of-war over how to regulate claims consulting companies. Congress for several years has been at a stalemate on whether to ban them outright, allow them to operate as they are or regulate them in some other way.

California is among 11 states that have moved to put the companies out of business, while another group of mostly Republican-led states has legalized them, according to reporting by the veteran news organization The War Horse.

That split in some ways reflects the different ways veterans themselves view the companies. The bill had overwhelming support from organizations that help veterans file benefits claims at no cost, such as the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars, as well as from Democratic Party leaders, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco.

But the VA’s claims process can take months and sow uncertainty among applicants. Several of the claims consulting companies say they have helped tens of thousands of veterans across the country, and that they have hundreds of employees.

Those trends led some lawmakers to vote against the measure, including Democrats with military backgrounds.

“We're going to say to you, ‘Veteran, you know what, I don't know if you are too stupid or too vulnerable or your judgment is so poor you can't choose yourself,'” said Sen. Tom Umberg, a Democrat and former Army colonel, during a debate over the measure last month.

The new law was such a close call for lawmakers that nine of 40 senators did not vote on it when it passed that chamber last month, which counts the same as a “no” vote but avoids offending a constituency that the lawmaker wants to keep.

It was also one of the 10 most-debated measures to go before the Legislature last year, according to the CalMatters Digital Democracy database. Lawmakers spent 4 hours and 39 minutes on the bill at public hearings in 2025 and heard testimony from 99 speakers.

Two claims consulting companies spent significant sums hiring lobbyists as they fought the bill, according to state records. They were Veterans Guardian, a North Carolina-based company that spent $150,000 on California lobbyists over the past two years; and Veterans Benefit Guide, a Nevada-based company that spent $371,821 lobbying on Archuleta’s bill and a similar measure that failed in 2024.

Those companies view laws like California’s as an existential threat. Both have founders with military backgrounds. Veterans Benefit Guide sued to block New Jersey’s law prohibiting fees for veterans claim consulting, and a federal appeals court sided with the company last year.

"This was the hardest bill I’ve had to work on since I’ve been in the Legislature," said Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo, a Santa Clarita Democrat who supported the law. "We know why that is, because there was so much money on the other side."

Charlotte Autolino, who organizes job fairs for former military service members as the chairperson of the Veterans Employment Committee of San Diego, criticized Newsom’s decision to sign the law. She spoke to CalMatters on behalf of Veterans Benefit Guide.

“The veterans lose,” she said. They lose the option. You’re taking an option away from them and you’re putting all of the veterans into one box, and that to me is wrong.”

But David West, a Marine veteran who is Nevada County’s veterans service officer, commended Newsom. West was one of the main advocates for the new law.

“The veterans of California are going to know that when (Newsom) says he’s taking care of everybody, he’s including us; that he values those 18- and 19-year-olds who are raising their hands, writing a blank check in the form of their lives; to then ensure that they aren’t writing checks to access their benefits,” West said.

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