The Brief

President Donald Trump has called for a temporary waiver of the federal gas tax, which costs drivers 18.4 cents per gallon.

It's one of several attempts to relieve pain at the pump as voters grow increasingly frustrated with gasoline prices, which have hit four-year highs thanks to the oil trade disruption triggered by the war with Iran.

A national gas tax holiday would require an act of Congress. Lawmakers have floated the idea, with several bills introduced before Trump called for a temporary pause on the tax.

But even with the president's backing, it's not clear whether his proposal will make it to the floor for a vote. Gas tax holidays are controversial, with advocates arguing they provide quick relief and with critics denouncing them as costly and even counterproductive.

Here's what you need to know.

How much would a federal gas tax holiday save? 

At most, waiving the tax would save drivers 18.4 cents per gallon, or $2.76 on a 15-gallon fill-up. The national average price for a gallon of gasoline is now $4.46, up from around $3 prewar, so the relief would make up for only a fraction of that price spike.

But there are two reasons that drivers might save even less. First, some of the tax savings might instead go toward refineries and gas stations. That's especially true for a shorter holiday, says Kent Smetters, the faculty director at the Penn Wharton Budget Model, which researches the cost of public policies.

"What we generally think is that over long periods of time, most of the tax cut would go to consumers," he says. "But over shorter periods of time, suppliers — even though it's fairly competitive to sell gas — they still have some market power." And that market power means they could hike their prices a little bit, eating into those tax savings and keeping some of the benefit for themselves.

Penn Wharton estimates that about 13.2 cents a gallon in savings would actually reach consumers; Adam Hoffer, the director of excise tax policy at the Tax Foundation think tank, estimates it's about 16 cents.

And second, waiving the gas tax can increase demand for gasoline; that's the natural result of lower prices. That could worsen the supply-demand imbalance that's driving prices up.

A pause on the federal gas tax alone probably isn't large enough to send demand soaring. But Patrick De Haan, an analyst with the app GasBuddy, told NPR this spring that if states widely suspend their own gas taxes, that could push demand — and prices — back up.

That's because state taxes are usually much higher than the federal tax. The amount varies by state — from 9 cents a gallon in Alaska to 70.9 cents in California. On average, states tack on an extra 33.3 cents per gallon.

A handful of states have already cut or paused their gas taxes. Kentucky lopped 10 cents off in May. Georgia completely froze its gas tax in March for two months and has extended its freeze as the conflict with Iran continues.

The price of a gas tax pause

While waiving gas taxes may save drivers a bit at the pump, it means less money for keeping roads safe.

Revenue from the federal gas tax goes into the Highway Trust Fund, which is used to pay for interstate construction and repair, as well as to invest in mass transit. Revenue from state gas taxes is often used for local road repairs.

The Penn Wharton Budget Model estimated that when Georgia paused its tax for two months, this cost the state about $361 million.

"Now we're talking real money," Smetters said.

That's less funding available to the state for repairs. "Anytime you take away a source of funding for highway construction and maintenance, then you're running the risk of the roads getting worse and not better," said Rob Bhatt, an insurance analyst at LendingTree, which recently issued a report about the condition of U.S. roads.

Drivers feel the pain of poorly maintained roads in very familiar ways: in potholes and dips. Patrick Marshall, a music teacher in New Orleans, wasn't watching close enough one morning and hit a dip that nearly broke a wheel off his 1989 GMC Sierra. The incident cost Marshall $2,500 and resulted in a 10-block walk to work.

"It's a tough hit to take when it's an unexpected expense," Marshall said.

(Well, not that unexpected — at least not in a city infamous for rough roads. When Marshall leads his students on brass and drum lines through New Orleans' streets, they know to shout warnings of "Pothole!" loud enough to eclipse the trumpets and French horns.)

All those pothole-related damages add up: AAA estimated that damage from potholes cost drivers some $26.5 billion in repairs in 2021.

Overall, this month's LendingTree report, which was based on federal data from 2024, found that 8.9% of the nation's road miles are in poor condition. Rhode Island scored the worst, with 31.5% of road miles rated as poor, with California and Massachusetts coming in second and third at 27.0% and 24.5%, respectively.

Minnesota stood out as the most improved between 2019 and 2024 — the state reduced the share of road miles rated as poor by more than 60%. But nationally, the report didn't find much improvement at all over that five-year span.

And even drivers in Rhode Island, the report's lowest-rated state, say potholes are bad everywhere. "I hit a pothole in New York City about a month ago, though that literally took life out of me," said Rhode Island resident Carleen Quattrucci.

The bigger problem: The gas tax is broken 

Here's even more bad news: The federal gas tax hasn't collected enough money to fully fund highway construction and repairs for years. And that fundamental problem is only getting worse.

It wasn't always like this. The gas tax was based on the premise that the people who use highways the most should pay the most for their upkeep. And the more miles a driver puts on their car, the more gasoline or diesel they purchase, so the more tax they pay — no toll booth required.

From the mid-1970s through the mid-1990s, that worked well, says the Tax Foundation's Hoffer.

"The revenue from gas tax collections was sufficient to cover all federal highway road construction and maintenance expenses," he says. "So the drivers were paying for the roads to be maintained and more roads to be built, when they drove on the roads. It was a terrific system."

But the last time the gas tax was raised was in 1993. It was 18.4 cents a gallon then; it's 18.4 cents a gallon now.

Yet since 1993, the cost of road repairs and construction has risen — and the price of gasoline has tripled.

"It's a weird tax," says Smetters, because it's not pegged to the price of gasoline, so it doesn't rise with inflation.

Meanwhile, new vehicles have gotten more fuel efficient, and per capita miles driven per year peaked 20 years ago. That means the government collects less and less with the gas tax.

Now, the tax falls short of the highway fund's needs every year. For 2026, the shortfall is estimated to be $17 billion. Congress has to keep making up the gap with general taxpayer funds.

Raising the federal tax wouldn't fix the problem for long 

Hypothetically, the national tax could be increased. After all, many states' gas taxes are set to raise automatically.

One problem: "Nobody likes gas taxes. Politicians don't like them. Drivers don't like them. Voters don't like them," Hoffer says. "So increasing these taxes is a real political challenge." That's even though higher gas taxes do have benefits. For example, by discouraging driving, they cut down on carbon emissions, which improves air quality and human health. And a well-designed gas tax is a fairer way of paying for highways than drawing from the general tax pool, Hoffer says.

But there's another problem: Gas taxes make less sense as more drivers choose electric vehicles. EVs use roads and highways, so they add to the wear and tear on infrastructure. But they don't burn gasoline. So as EVs make up a growing share of vehicles, even a significantly higher gas tax would be doomed. It would bring in less money over time, because fewer drivers would pay it.

Many states have imposed EV registration fees to address this problem; the federal government is also considering adding one. However, because EVs still make up a very small share of vehicles, this doesn't come close to addressing the gas tax shortfall. Also, in many cases the fee for EVs is — or would be — much higher than the typical driver pays in gas taxes, creating an unfair system. Other potential solutions are being debated too. A lobbying group representing major automakers is pushing for a fee that all car owners would pay based on vehicle weight, so trucks would pay more than sedans. Heavier vehicles are harder on roads.

Some states are experimenting with road-user fees, which drivers pay based on how many miles they drive. In some cases, the programs use odometer readings; in others, they rely on devices or phone apps to measure miles driven. While economists say they're a fairer way to collect revenue — because, like with a gas tax traditionally, the people who use roads the most contribute the most toward their upkeep — those plans can raise privacy concerns, depending on the technology used to track miles driven.

Smetters, of the Penn Wharton Budget Model, also points to congestion fees and toll lanes as alternative funding mechanisms.

None of these ideas has yet caught on as a replacement for the federal fuel tax. But one thing is clear: At some point down the road, this tax is going to run out of gas.
Copyright 2026 NPR

The union that represents 29,000 faculty members is asking its members to authorize a strike after negotiations with California State University reached an impasse. Members have till November 19 to vote.

The California Faculty Association last went on strike in January 2024.

Now they are back at the bargaining table. While the union seeks pay raises, members say this negotiation is also about all the ways higher education has changed since they won their last contract: That includes provisions guaranteeing academic freedom — in the face of pressure from the Trump administration over DEI and and artificial intelligence guardrails.

“This is the boldest proposal we've had as a bargaining team, as a union,” said Elaine Villanueva Bernal, who teaches chemistry at Cal State Long Beach and also serves on the bargaining team.

She and other members of the union rallied this past week in support of the authorization vote, one of many such demonstrations across the state.

They said the union is fighting for members to decide whether or not to use artificial intelligence and to “not to be replaced with AI, for our work not to be evaluated by AI.”

Even if the vote passes, that doesn’t mean a strike will happen; contract talks can still continue.

Elaine Villanueva Bernal teaches chemistry at Cal State Long Beach and serves on the CFA bargaining team.

(

Yusra Farzan

/

LAist

)

In an emailed statement, Amy Bentley-Smith, a spokesperson for the university system, said CSU has reached agreements with four other unions “demonstrating that meaningful agreements can be achieved through collective bargaining.”

“We believe that continued negotiations, rather than a strike, offer the best path toward reaching a fair and sustainable agreement with CFA. Our priority remains supporting our faculty, serving our students and avoiding unnecessary disruption to their education,” she said.

Why is another strike possible?

In January 2024, faculty members went on strike across the state, disrupting classes for around 500,000 students. The strike lasted one day — to the disbelief of many union members.

“The last contract sucked. The union caved after one day. We had all the momentum of faculty here and a lot of support to keep the strike going,” said Helen Hood Scheer, a cinematic arts professor at Cal State Long Beach. “However, I will say that at some of the other CSUs that are not as healthy as we are, I think some other people felt like it was a good contract.”

Helen Hood Scheer and her friend came out to a rally in Cal State Long Beach to signal their support for a strike authorization vote after negotiations between the California Faculty Association and CSU reached an impasse.

(

Yusra Farzan

/

LAist

)

She said she drove over an hour on a day she does not have to teach to be on campus for the rally to “let the chancellor know that we’re serious.” Hood Scheer said some professors are living below the poverty line, while CSU Chancellor Mildred Garcia makes close to $1 million annually.

 Lily Housepeters, an associate professor of geography at Cal State Long Beach and vice president of the CFA Long Beach chapter, said the bargaining team has made changes because some members were ready to strike longer and were disappointed with some of the contract gains.

“This time around, we have a much more inclusive bargaining team. We've expanded our bargaining team. We have members of our bargaining team from every single campus,” she said.

The impact of the Trump administration on faculty

The landscape of higher education has also changed since the last contract.

Contract negotiations have centered federal funding cuts to research and to grants that sought to increase representation of historically excluded groups on campus.

“ We should be able to teach the classes that we need to teach, that we want to teach, that students actually demand, without government or political interference,” said Melissa Hidalgo, a lecturer in women’s, gender and sexuality studies at Cal State Long Beach. “When your federal government tries to tell you that certain subjects are off the table now because they don't like them, when you can't talk about things like gender and race anymore, when we start to have directives coming from the top down, this is how we know that our, our academic freedom is under attack.”

CFA members and supporters rally in support of a strike authorization vote after negotiations between the union and CSU reached an impasse.

(

Yusra Farzan

/

LAist

)

Deborah Ham, a retired education professor, came out to support the rally on Tuesday at CSU Long Beach. As someone who has taught for over 35 years, Ham said, the attacks on education are nothing like she’s seen before.

“I feel an attack on our work, on our way of life, on our way of believing, on our humanity, and it's very, very painful. As someone who taught children and English as a second language to immigrants, to see the attack on everyone is just Nazism,” she said. “It just is frightening to me, and I don't like seeing this in my community. And so that's another reason why I am here, to protect our community.”

Ronald Loewe, a professor of anthropology said academic freedom protections are important because he has seen pushback on faculty and students who have spoken out in support of Palestinian rights.

At rallies including the one on campus on Tuesday, faculty members use amplified sound and it’s something that has been done for years, he said. But, during a protest in support of Palestinian rights,  ”five faculty members were sanctioned for using amplified sound. There's been a lot of attempts to kind of pick on faculty members and students who've spoken out in favor of Palestine or have been critical of Israel.”

A spokesperson for Cal State Long Beach told LAist no faculty member has been disciplined for taking part in actions related to Palestinian advocacy.

AI has changed contract negotiations

Loewe also wants to see strong artificial intelligence guardrails in the new contract.

“I think that the university has really excluded us from having kind of any input or any say in the development of artificial intelligence on campus. It's affecting our teaching, it's affecting student learning, and it's making people stupid,” he said.

The CSU system recently renewed a controversial contract with OpenAI that costs $13 million annually, a decision Loewe and Housepeters say faculty were not consulted on.

 ”We also see lots of other spending throughout the CSU that we would argue is wasteful or is not in priority with faculty working conditions, which are student learning conditions,” Housepeters said.

During the recent heat waves that pummeled Southern California, for instance, she said some faculty had to work in offices without air conditioning where temperatures hit over 90 degrees.

The union, Housepeters said, is also fighting for improved working conditions and reducing workload for some faculty members. She said the union wants “ a transformational contract where tenure-track faculty would receive more time for research, and our lecturer faculty would receive more time for service because currently all of their service is uncompensated.”

Some students are joining the rallies

Joining the faculty members in support of their fight for a new contract were students Christina Henry and Zack Medway.

Henry, who is studying history, said she hoped to become a professor one day.

“I think it's important that our professors get a living wage. They do so much to set us up for our future careers. Their career should be rewarding for them as well,” she said.

“ If we truly want to value education as a country,” said Medway, a graduate student, “we need to honor and respect the people who do the work and the people who do the learning, and know that learning is uncomfortable and necessary.”

Consumers who buy Affordable Care Act health insurance are going to see changes both big and small as open enrollment for 2027 coverage kicks off. These include premium increases, possible additional identity checks, potential delays in working with a broker and new limits on which immigrants can get subsidies.

Shoppers need to plan accordingly.

Open enrollment starts Nov. 1 in most states. Idaho, Connecticut, and Massachusetts started earlier, and some states have been allowing "window shopping" to check premium rates.

A continued decline in overall enrollment is expected, mainly because of the expiration of enhanced subsidies at the end of 2025. Policy experts say the end of those subsidies led millions to drop or lose coverage through the first few months of this year.

But the Trump administration sees victory in the falling enrollment, crediting its various efforts to reduce fraud, including the August cancellation of policies covering 760,000 enrollees suspected to be improperly signed up. A small number of those enrollees have regained coverage.

Have your ID ready

One of the biggest changes for people shopping for their 2027 coverage will be increased scrutiny of both consumers and agents. The requirements are aimed at thwarting fraud or improper enrollments. For consumers, it could slow the enrollment process.

The new rules, outlined by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, affect only consumers using agents or brokers to help them enroll through the federal marketplace, which serves 29 states. They do not apply to state-based exchanges, which have their own rules and have in most cases been more successful at preventing fraudulent sign-ups.

For starters, all consumers using an agent in the federal marketplace will need to get a one-time confirmation code or link to authorize a specific agent to enroll them or make changes on their behalf. It will be sent to consumers by text message, email or an automated phone call from one of the private enrollment platforms used by their agent. Returning consumers who have incorrect or outdated contact information will first need to call the federal marketplace themselves or submit an application online to update it.

Additionally, consumers and policyholders deemed "high-risk" must verify their own identity before authorizing an agent. CMS defines as "high-risk" first-time applicants or those with existing coverage whose applications involve a change of state, as well as consumers working with a new or different agent or with a monthly premium payment of $30 or less.

Joshua Brooker, who oversees an insurance agency in Pennsylvania, said CMS appears to have selected people in those groups for greater scrutiny because "someone who is moving to a new state or switching brokers — that could be a broker trying to impersonate a consumer."

The $30-a-month cutoff may be tied to concerns that plans with no or low monthly premiums are easier for bad agents to target for unauthorized enrollments because the policyholder may never get a bill. Some rogue agents even pay the low monthly amount themselves and still make a profit from the commission, Brooker said.

The broad nature of the new rules, though, has Brooker concerned "that up to 1 in 5 consumers is going to have to do extra identity proofing" and may just give up and not get insured.

Consumers designated high-risk must prove their identity through a CMS-approved third party such as credit company Experian, which generally asks questions only the consumer should be able to answer. People who fail this test may be asked to call Experian's help desk or submit their applications themselves by creating a healthcare.gov account, which requires them to upload identification such as a driver's license, a passport, immigration papers or another form of ID.

"Some people may have trouble not because they're not real, but because they don't have a credit file, or have moved, or have changed names," said Stacey Pogue, a senior research fellow at the Center on Health Insurance Reforms at Georgetown University.

She said the changes might "be an appropriate response by CMS that targets fraudulent enrollments but might also create extra hurdles."

There may be fewer brokers

CMS in September issued a rule that places a moratorium on brokers new to offering ACA coverage. Agents not registered with the federal marketplace in 2026 will not be allowed to assist with enrollments for 2027 until February at the earliest, past the end of open enrollment season.

CMS said it took this step because a disproportionate number of "significant compliance concerns" in 2026 came from newly registered agents or brokers. Additionally, the agency has kicked out "hundreds of non-compliant agents and brokers" this year.

Jason Fine, who runs a brokerage in Florida, said he agrees with the concept behind these changes. He has reported multiple times to CMS, for instance, that rogue agents have switched his clients' coverage without authorization, wanting the agency to take action against them. But he said the updated rules also raise concerns.

"Everything they are doing in the long term makes sense," he said. However, in the short term, "I don't know if they care about the chaos it will cause."

That's because the moratorium will make it much harder for small brokers to help clients this year. His agency and others often pare their staffing after open enrollment but hire again toward the end of the year. He was planning to add up to 10 agents to his core staff of about five but has been told by recruiters that he's unlikely to be able to find anyone who was registered for 2026 and is still available.

He suggested that the move unintentionally benefits larger call centers, some of which were doing much of the marketing that regulators feared led to unauthorized switching. Call centers often maintain larger staffs.

"They can afford to keep a staff of 25 or 40 people all year long," Fine said.

Groups representing agents are very unhappy with the directive. One, the National Association of Benefits and Insurance Professionals, filed a lawsuit on Oct. 15 against the Trump administration over the moratorium, saying it unfairly targets 19,000 agents who may want to sell ACA plans for next year.

"Just because you're a new agent doesn't mean you are fraudulent," said Ronnell Nolan, president of Health Agents for America, another sales agent group, which on Oct. 21 filed suit seeking a temporary restraining order on the moratorium. "All these agencies who have trained new agents and paid thousands of dollars now have people who won't be able to work."

It all leads to an important piece of advice from Georgetown's Pogue: Consumers should not delay making appointments. "If you rely on an agent or broker, and a lot of people do, their slots might fill up faster because there will be fewer of them to help with enrollment. I would reach out early."

Costs will continue to be an issue

This year, after Congress did not renew the expiring enhanced subsidies, most people getting ACA coverage saw what they had to pay increase. Higher earners lost subsidies entirely. Add in double-digit premium increases, and most people had to pay substantially more for their coverage.

Still, most people who buy ACA coverage for next year will receive a subsidy. It will just be less generous than it was before the enhancements expired at the end of 2025.

The subsidies are pegged to the premium costs of benchmark plans, the name given to the second-lowest-priced silver-tier plan in an area.

This helps offset premium increases.

"For most folks, overall affordability will stay about the same," said Louise Norris, a health policy analyst for HealthInsurance.org. "That's not to say it's great, but if you were able to manage the premiums this year, it should be similar to that."

But there are other factors at work, too.

Last year's average premium increase of 26% was the largest in years. It was driven in part by insurers' fear that the expiration of subsidies would cause healthier people to drop out of the marketplace. Other drivers often cited for such increases include a rise in overall medical care costs and general inflation, and labor shortages.

For the upcoming year, those dynamics remain a concern, with premiums slated for double-digit increases, although at 15%, slightly lower than last year.

Subsidies are income-based and cut off for households earning more than four times the federal poverty rate. During this open enrollment season, that amount is $63,840 for a single person, $86,560 for a couple, and $109,280 for a family of three, for example.

"The biggest issue we will face is affordability," said Anne Petry, who, with her father, owns Jaggi Petry Insurance & Investments in Forsyth, Illinois, and helps customers purchase health insurance, including ACA plans. "There definitely will come a breaking point for people."

Agents and other experts say consumers should not allow their plans to automatically renew and should instead go online to compare premiums and coverage, which can change each year even for the same plan. There may be less expensive alternatives, including plans from new insurers, so they suggest looking at not just premiums, but also deductibles and other costs. At the same time, several insurers, including Cigna, have dropped all or part of their ACA coverage areas.

"If you just sit on the sidelines and let the policy auto-renew, you might miss out on what could be a better opportunity," Norris said. She said it is important to check options because the cap on out-of-pocket maximums for ACA plans is also increasing.

That amount, which represents the most a consumer must pay toward deductibles, copayments and coinsurance before the policy is expected to cover remaining in-network medical costs, was $10,600 for an individual and $21,200 for a family plan this year. In 2027, it will grow by 13% to $12,000 for an individual and $24,000 for family coverage. Lower caps on out-of-pocket maximums are set for households earning up to 2.5 times the federal poverty level.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Congress passed last year, also strips subsidy eligibility from many lawfully present immigrants, including people holding temporary H-1B work visas, refugees, asylees, people with temporary protected status, and those with pending green-card applications.

Three immigrant groups can still get ACA subsidies: green-card holders, who have permanent legal status; certain Cuban and Haitian immigrants; and citizens of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands or Palau.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Copyright 2026 KFF Health News

WASHINGTON (AP) — More than 4 in 10 names flagged as possible noncitizen voters in California by the Trump administration cannot be found on the state’s voter rolls, according to a legal filing Saturday by an immigrant-rights group.

It’s the first outside analysis of a list that the Department of Justice has used to threaten prosecution of election officials. The analysis also found that thousands of U.S. citizens appear to be flagged as ineligible to vote on the government’s list.

The contention was made in a filing by two data analysts at the University of California, Los Angeles. They analyzed the 20,930 names that the department demanded that California election officials treat as possible illegal voters by separating their ballots during the vote count on Election Day.

Multiple judges have rejected the demand as unconstitutional and a threat to democracy, and local and state officials have said the list appears riddled with errors.

Court filing outlines problems with government list

The breadth of the problems with the list was outlined in Saturday’s filing. It describes an analysis by two members of UCLA’s Voting Rights Project, who filed a lawsuit challenging it with the Los Angeles-based Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA.

The research found that 8,880 of the names, representing 42% of the entire list, do not correspond to anyone in California’s current voter file. It also found at least 22 are U.S. citizens, and many more may correspond to those of confirmed citizens.

“The expert analysis further makes clear that the mandated voter list endangers a significant number of eligible California voters,” said the filing, which was cosigned by Xavier Becerra, the Democratic candidate for California governor and an adviser to the UCLA Voting Rights Project. null

The Trump administration had objected to sharing the list, calling it a “fishing expedition” and noting that it included sensitive information. On Saturday, the federal prosecutor who spearheaded the Trump case in California called the analysis “bogus.”

“This is a bogus report by the activist illegal immigrant rights group CHIRLA,” Bill Essayli, who runs the U.S. Attorney’s office in Los Angeles, posted on X.

Also on Saturday, President Donald Trump bemoaned the legal rulings against his effort to force California to separate votes from the individuals his administration labels suspected noncitizens, even though one came from a judge he himself nominated.

In a social media post, Trump claimed his Justice Department found “20,000, but potentially Hundreds of Thousands, and maybe even Millions,” of fraudulent votes, “and the Court has just ruled against it. Why would they reject fixing Election Fraud?”

The Trump administration has also urged Washington state to remove what it says were 400 possible noncitizens on its rolls, though state election officials there say that list is also unreliable and includes one voter who cast ballots in the 1990s.

The Justice Department has warned California election officials they could face criminal liability if they let noncitizens vote and issued subpoenas to election officials there.

Election officials say they have no time to investigate

Election officials have complained that the Trump administration has confronted them with lists of possible illegal voters at the last minute before Election Day, with no time to conduct the painstaking investigation required by law before removing someone from the rolls.

Multiple lawsuits have been filed to stop the administration from continuing to threaten local election officials.

On Friday, a federal judge in California ordered the Justice Department to stop sending demands to state officials, a decision the Trump administration appealed Saturday. Several counties in the state had run quick checks of the Trump list and found numerous errors.

Saturday’s broader analysis was possible because a federal judge on Friday ordered the Trump administration to share the list with the plaintiffs in the case.

CHIRLA and the UCLA project sued the Homeland Security Department in early October to prevent it from using federal immigration data to challenge state voter rolls. The lawsuit cited examples in other states where the federal government’s data has been proven to mistakenly include thousands of citizens.

Case argues that government’s methods pose risk to voting

The case argued that the data-matching methods risk disenfranchising or deterring citizens from voting. On top of that, plaintiffs argued, the lists could disproportionately target naturalized citizens who are legally entitled to vote.

Applying the government’s methodology, the UCLA researchers found that nearly 7,500 naturalized citizens in the state were “highly likely” to be incorrectly flagged as ineligible.

The researchers noted that the administration apparently removed the voter identification number from the names, making it harder for election officials to determine whether the flagged individuals were already on their rolls or were duplicates in the Justice Department list. They described the voter ID number as the most crucial data point.

The Justice Department argues that there is just as much to lose if the ballots aren’t separated.

“Every ballot cast by an ineligible voter cancels out the vote of an American citizen,” Kiersten V. Pels, a spokesperson for the department, wrote in an email. “The Department makes no apology for protecting those votes.”

For many of us, karaoke is a chance to sing our favorite shower song in public.

But at a North Hollywood bar every Wednesday night, it’s a team sport. And competitors in the L.A. Karaoke league are more serious about putting on an over-the-top production than hitting all the right notes.

At a social in late September, league manager Michelle Goff kicked off a new season of weekly themed showdowns, from dance-floor favorites to internet memes to songs inspired by birds.

Brittany Gates, the CEO of United Karaoke, who was visiting from D.C., did her rendition of 'Let's Hear It For The Boy' by Deniece Williams.

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

"You are going to see numbers that people came up with in their crazy dreams maybe three years ago, and it's going to be amazing,” Goff told performers at the social. “And then they’re never going to be done again.”

Michelle Goff unveils the different themed weeks, from dance-floor favorites to internet memes to songs inspired by birds.

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

Performances range from solos to group numbers, and the crowd votes for its favorites. Props and costumes are highly encouraged.

Here, dark wizards from Harry Potter duet to Taylor Swift. A singer tosses flowers to the crowd while belting Seal's “Kiss From a Rose.” Once, Goff danced around as an erupting Mount Vesuvius as her teammates sang Bastille's "Pompeii."

Like intramural sports but with microphones, teams compete over six weeks, followed by two weeks of playoffs, then the finals.

It all happens at the Good Nite bar, on a darkened stretch of Burbank Boulevard. Inside, there’s an inviting purple glow and warm conversation that can be hard to come by in a city as big as L.A.

“You know, the city, exciting as it is, still has so many strangers,” said Carlos Mulia.

A newcomer to the league, the chef-turned-actor already feels like he belongs.

“Sometimes you can go to a karaoke bar and everyone’s talking and no one’s paying attention to you — that can be a downer,” he said. “But here, everyone’s contributing, everyone’s cheering for each other.”

For Mulia, the league also offers a creative outlet during Hollywood’s production slowdown, when he says opportunities to perform are scarce.

Actor Carlos Mulia said competitive karaoke gives him a creative outlet and a place to find community in a big city.

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

“There’s not that many auditions," he said. "They’re far and few between, and it can really affect your psyche. So this allows you to just let it all out.”

The L.A. league started in Santa Monica in 2014 before moving among venues around the region and finding its current home at the Good Nite in 2021.

It’s part of United Karaoke, a loose national network with chapters in Washington, D.C., Baltimore and Chicago. The local leagues share a competition format, voting app and a pledge to keep the vibe welcoming.

In the league, friendships spark right away. Mulia hit it off with another actor, Jordan Delgado, who teaches children art at a studio.

They quickly figured out they’re both half-Filipino and grew up with karaoke, a fixture of Filipino social life.

“It is in our blood to do karaoke,” Delgado said. “So yeah, I’m honoring my ancestors in a way by being here tonight.”

Anybody is welcome on karaoke competition nights and invited to vote for their favorite performances.

(

Josie Huang

/

LAist

)

Delgado loves to perform but says the karaoke league promises more than that.

“It’s something to look forward to in the downtime of the part-time jobs,” Delgado said. “A reason to regularly meet up with people, where we could just be silly, without any judgment.”

For her league debut, Delgado is going with a tried and true crowd-pleaser.

“My go-to song that my friends and family have heard me sing a billion times is ‘You and I’ by Lady Gaga," Delgado said. "It really gets the crowd going.”

When it’s her turn, Delgado bounds onto the tiny stage up front with a big confident smile that matches a powerful voice.

“We got a whole lot of money, but still pay rent,” Delgado sings, striding across the tiny stage to whoops and cheers.

Several weeks after her league debut, Delgado would go on to win best performer during Graveyard Week, when the league revives songs so overdone they’re normally off-limits.

Her winning number? “Shallow,” with Delgado singing both the Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper parts.

And she brought the theatrical flair. Dressed as Gaga on one side of her body and Cooper on the other, she was her own duet partner.