Katie Porter talks to LAist about why she should be California's next governor (Transcript)

Here's a transcript of the conversation that took place May 21 as part of an AirTalk series with candidates.

Her planned approach to the job

Larry Mantle: Most of the Democratic candidates have staked out positions that subtly differ from those of Governor Newsom. I'm curious, in what area do you think you are most distinctly different in approach from the current governor?

Katie Porter: My focus on oversight and on accountability is different.

It's something that I did differently when I was in Congress, gaining a lot of acclaim for my ability to hold people, government entities, and private actors to account. And that work and approach really grew out of the work that I did as the statewide foreclosure prevention, eviction prevention monitoring under our then-Attorney General Kamala Harris.

And that work was focused on not just what is the law, but how do we get businesses, actors, entities, government to comply with the law. And so what I've seen sometimes is a lot of good focus on ideas from Governor Newsom, homelessness, for example, housing, things that he talked a lot about when he ran and still talks a lot about.

But digging into why are some of these things, like Care Court, for example, which I think the vast majority of Californians supported, not actually working very well. And so one of the things I would kinda really push and work in partnership with both my own administration, but also the legislature is not just, “is this a good idea,” but how will we measure whether this good idea is translating into improving Californians' lives, saving tax dollars.

Following the money

Mantle: Let's take a concrete example. California spent over $24 billion on homelessness services over a five-year period. That's independent of what cities and counties spent. There are billions more that L.A. City and County and other counties in the state have spent. Here in L.A., LAHSA allegedly sent millions of dollars to a provider with nonexistent board members.

So what would you specifically do as governor when it comes to homelessness funding, these billions of dollars, to account for where they're being spent and to determine whether where it is really being spent is producing a benefit?

Porter: This is a great example. So two parts to this.

One is I would direct more money to preventing homelessness, not just to what we've done so far which is very slow and very difficult, very important, which is building permanent supportive housing.

And that's where our most, that's where all of our money really has gone so far, and people are concerned about whether it's delivered results. So let's talk about that in a second. But the prevention piece is incredibly important, and we have some very successful, really nationally renowned, but very small programs here in California that are preventing people from becoming homeless, and that costs about an average of $6,000.

That's about the typical amount of intervention it takes to keep someone from losing their home. Compare that to the $800,000, $900,000, million dollars it takes, and not always successful even at that, to help someone who's been homeless and been living on the street. So first I would try to move our intervention forward in the process.

That's a much better use of our tax dollars. We get way more bang for each dollar we spend, and it's also more humane because we're preventing people from ever going through the struggles that come with being homeless. With regard to the money that's being spent, I think this is a great example of what I was just talking about.

So I think too often what I see is on all sides of an angle people fighting about how much we're gonna spend and not focusing nearly enough on what are we going to expect to see the outcomes, how are we gonna measure it, and if we're not getting there, how do we reassess?

So nobody should be getting hundreds of millions, much less billions of dollars, without a clear reporting structure, and without a targeted benchmark to hit. And so we saw a lot of this in Congress when I was in Congress, Larry, around COVID funding. We rolled these programs out, and they were important programs, but with no checks and balances.

And what did we see as a result? So much fraud. Unemployment fraud, PPP pandemic assistance fraud from businesses. So you've got to balance getting the dollars out the door with having a well-thought-out and consistent set of objectives. You shouldn't bury these entities in paperwork, that's not the goal.

The goal is to say, “this is what we expect to see for the money.”

Mantle: But how do you do that without burying them in paperwork? Because you used the COVID funds as an example, which I think is a good comparison because similarly there, the feds are trying to crank out money to deal with COVID because it is an urgent need.

So oversight goes out the window. Homelessness is perceived as an urgent need, so apparently oversight has largely gone out the window. So how do you create an oversight infrastructure that you're describing without there being a lot of reporting paperwork, without it taking more time for money to be dispersed and for programs to, and all of this has trade-offs. So how do you manage those trade-offs?

Porter: This is exactly where I think I am really head and shoulders above the other governor's candidates, in having designed programs that did exactly this. So when I ran the statewide foreclosure prevention program, it was after Attorney General Harris had signed a deal, and the banks had promised to change their practices and deliver $12 billion in relief.

And what we were able to do was establish clear benchmarks for them to be making progress. And we also had a line in for whistleblowers right at the start for consumers, for homeowners who were being cheated to contact us. I built a custom database to keep track of what was happening on the ground and to hold the banks accountable.

But I think right now what you're seeing is you're seeing people say, "This is a big problem. We need a lot of money to solve it." And what you're not seeing is, “What would the system look like?” You cannot build these kinds of systems under crisis. A great example of this, going back to COVID, is unemployment fraud.

We have had a big problem in California for 40 years with unemployment fraud, and it's not coming from everyday workers. It's coming from organized criminal enterprises. And we have not invested in the infrastructure, in the IT, in the systems that would audit and prevent that kind of fraud. So as a result, every time we see unemployment spike, whether that's the foreclosure crisis, whether that's COVID, we are seeing lots of dollars, and to be clear, they're workers' dollars, they are businesses' dollars that are being paid into the unemployment system.

Mantle: And it clogs up the system, as we saw with the Employment Development Department, they couldn't respond to the legitimate claims because there's so many fraudulent ones clogging the system.

How she'd negotiate with labor

Mantle: I want to move on to talk about the effect and the leverage of labor unions in California because, as you well know, labor unions, very close allies of Democratic candidates not just the fundraising ability through organized labor, but the human power that they can bring to get out the vote campaigns and other things are massive.

So given that kind of leverage, if you were elected governor of California, what would you do to assure that you're not just representing organized labor, but that you're pushing back on the demands of labor when you think it's appropriate to do so?

Porter: This is really important. I believe in labor because of their values, but they have to be accountable, too, to deliver on those values.

So a really good example of this is that I think labor is rightfully really worried about the effect of AI on jobs, and a lot of what they're asking for is a ban. Can we ban this or that technology or this or that use of AI for two years, five years? The larger question is, then what? What happens after the ban?

And a lot of the jobs that we are going to see threatened or lost because of AI are not currently unionized jobs. So I think it's important to engage with labor, but my vote and what I'm looking for is good ideas. I am not for sale. And I have a track record of both going to the mat for labor when I thought they were right, standing up to Democrats who were not willing to help labor, but also being willing to break cause with labor when I think what they're doing or what they're pushing for doesn't make sense.

And so I think you have to take a data-driven approach. I think you have to be willing to have a kind of marketplace of ideas. We should be doing what makes the most sense, not what is best for any interest group in Sacramento, whether that's one whose values I share or one whose values I disagree with.

On AI's impact on the labor force

Mantle: Governor Newsom, just before we went on the air today, issued an executive order directing the state to prepare workers, small businesses, and communities for economic disruptions arising from artificial intelligence in the workforce, the order mobilizing state agencies, labor experts, economists, universities, and industry leaders to develop new policies, gather data, and identify early warning signs of workforce disruption.

That from the governor's office. This all, I'm sure, sounds good to people in principle, but, what specifically would you do to try and deal with employment disruptions driven by AI?

Porter: Yeah, so first, this is exactly the right conversation to have, but the timing matters. We are already behind in thinking about this.

AI job loss is not coming in the future, it is already occurring. I'm a professor. I work on a campus. We are already seeing our graduates in what were formerly some of the, quote, "best majors for jobs" now being unable to find them. So I wish this is a conversation we would've started two years ago and four years ago.

I do think it's the right conversation to have. Look, I think the real question comes down to two things. One, what kind of work are we comfortable as a society wanting AI to do? And what kind of work do we just think should be done by humans with all of their strengths and all of their weaknesses?

So I'll give you an example. I don't want AI to sing to me. I want a human being to sing, and if that means that they miss certain notes or forget the lyrics, I think that is part of the charm and the joy of it I don't want AI to write stories. I read fiction to feel connected to other human beings.

There are other things where I think we can say, "Look, this job is dangerous, it's dirty, it's unsafe. If AI can do this better, if AI can better detect tumors to save lives, great." So I'll say just because AI can technologically do something doesn't mean we should choose to do it. And then the second piece, Larry, is who gets the benefit of all of that increased wealth that's gonna come from AI?

AI doesn't know how to do these jobs by itself. It's taking the work that people have done and continue to do, the work that humans have done, and it's capitalizing on that to build AI models. People should be compensated for that input. And so you're seeing some AI companies talk about, for example, the potential of AI to deliver things like a four-day work week, a 32-hour work week.

That is not coming from the Democratic establishment. They can't think that big sometimes. That's actually coming from AI companies, that they see just how transformative this could be.

Mantle: So what is the role for government when it comes to AI? I understand what you're saying about compensating people for intellectual property or things they've spent decades in their career building up, which then can be synthesized through AI.

But talking about the market, you saying you prefer hearing a human voice to, to one that's artificially constructed, but if the market were to vote economically and people eventually determine they prefer synthesized AI-generated voices or acting performance or literature wouldn't that be the public's right to, to decide that in the marketplace versus government trying to abridge that?

Porter: So I think the question is, do you think a marketplace like this, dominated by a handful of incredibly large, powerful companies with very large control over what gets produced, this is not a diffused marketplace with a whole bunch of small actors, right? This is a handful of very large companies. Do we think the marketplace, the economic marketplace, is a better way to make decisions about what we as a society want than having voters do it?

So I think, for example, AI can write lesson plans for teachers. Do we want AI to do that, or do we want teachers to do that? That's something we should talk about. AI can write a sermon for a, or a speech for a politician or a religious figure. Do we want that? And I think that the issue with the marketplace deciding, and I am a person who really believes in markets, is just what we've seen over and over again, for example, with social media, I think is really important to reflect on here, which is so many people say, "I don't like this algorithm, I don't like looking at this." But the way it's been designed makes it difficult to stop.

Prices at the pump

Mantle: Let's talk about on the start of this Memorial Day weekend with so many people traveling by car, we have refinery closures, higher state taxes, war in the Middle East, California with the highest gas prices in the continental U.S.

You can't control what's happening internationally, but if you were elected governor, what would be your plan, if you'd have one, to reduce prices at the pump?

Porter: Yeah, so when I ran for Congress the first time in 2018, the gas tax adding 12 cents a gallon was on the ballot, and I was one of only a half dozen or so Democrats in the state who opposed adding that tax then, and certainly the only progressive Democrat that I can think of who opposed adding that gas tax.

And the reason, which we're seeing play out again and again in people's lives, is that gas taxes are fundamentally regressive. They harm those who have the longest commutes. They harm those who have older model, less fuel efficient cars. They hurt those who can't afford the extra five, 10, 15, $20,000 that an electric vehicle might cost.

And so I think that we should stop adding gas taxes. We can't fund infrastructure this way, infrastructure should be funded out of the general fund. California had higher gas prices before the Iran war came along, but the truth is, the Iran war has been the single driver of why gas prices have spiked.

And we've seen that spike $1 plus per gallon in every single part of the country, and that is a direct result of Donald Trump's choices.

Working with the President

Mantle: Speaking of Donald Trump, California Democrats seem to support candidates that are the most vociferous in criticizing President Trump and his administration.

If you were elected governor, to what extent would you devote time and energy to going after Trump?

Porter: That would be entirely dependent on what Donald Trump did vis-a-vis Californians. Look, if Donald Trump is going to do right and treat Californians for what they are, which is valuable citizens and people and residents of the United States, that California is an economic engine, that we're the largest state, if he's gonna do right by us, great.That would be the best thing for Californians.

That doesn't mean I don't wanna defeat him and make sure he's not elected again, obviously that’s unconstitutional, and make sure that we end electing people who are his allies. I ran for Congress the first time in 2018 to stand up to Donald Trump, went to Congress and did that successfully over and over again.

But the truth is, like California needs its fair share from the federal government. We are not getting the wildfire assistance that we need. We are seeing de-investment from things like our public lands, our national forests, our national parks, which, we absolutely need. We are seeing a lot of Trump's healthcare policies targeting things that California takes pride in doing including providing healthcare to the broadest number of people.

So if Donald Trump wanted to change direction with regard to California, I think that's something we should all welcome, because real Californians are being hurt right now by his policies. But make no mistake, if he attacks Californians, I will not flinch and I will not hesitate to protect Californians and that means standing up to Donald Trump.

On healthcare funding

Mantle: Do you think in the in the immediate term it's going to be possible for California to continue to cover through the Medi-Cal program undocumented residents? Is that gonna be fundable?

Porter: I think it has to be fundable because the truth is we have to pay for healthcare either way, and we've been down this path.

I think it's important to look back at California's history here, which we have a long history. We had an ugly period in our history of denying healthcare, trying to deny education, and other things to people who were undocumented. And those people are not going to, avoid injury just because, or avoid getting sick.

They're gonna show up in our emergency rooms. They're gonna show up without health insurance. They're not gonna get vaccines. They're not gonna get preventative care, and ultimately, that is the most expensive option for California taxpayers and for California as a state budget, is to have people who are uninsured.

Recall, the whole point of having the Affordable Care Act was that we know that it is cheaper and better to provide people with health insurance and therefore healthcare than it is to allow them going uninsured. And not only is this an issue with regard to undocumented people, what Donald Trump has done with regard to premiums on the Affordable Care Act means we have a whole other group of people who are US citizens, who are on the Affordable Care Act, who are gonna be unable to afford their premiums and also going to be uninsured. So making sure we provide coverage for those people is important.

Mantle: So Katie Porter how does the state backfill what you're describing as decreases in federal funding? Because according to state legislative analyst's office, there's a structural $20 to $35 billion deficit, a chronic deficit built into California's budget.

Costs are only going up, and as the revenue that's generated in California predominantly comes from the highest income earners. It's a highly progressive income tax dependent on stock market returns, which is, bailing the state out a little bit, at least it appears, for the forthcoming budget. So if you were elected, how would you deal with this structural deficit?

Porter: So I think there are two things to solve for. One, you highlighted, which is the instability. So I think thinking about what Governor Brown did with the rainy day fund, going back to that idea and strengthening it so we have even more capacity to have that rainy day fund to do budget smoothing from year to year.

That's an important piece of this. But you're right, Larry, and we should be honest about this. And this is why I think being, electing a governor who will take on the status quo in Sacramento is so important. Not take it on with a sledgehammer, not go to blow it up and to, to say things like, "Sacramento will hate me."

That's, to me, that's irresponsible and not good partnership, not good leadership. But at the same time, we can't have a governor who just says, "I'll get 'er done. I'll keep things the way they are," because the way they are isn't good enough. So here's how I would decide. Every single dollar coming in as a tax dollar and then going back, you have to assess, “is this money that if we spend it today, tomorrow it will generate more revenue?”

So if we invest in things like our UC system that is money that we know returns five, six, tenfold. Things like free school lunches. We were spending more money asking kids if they deserved a lunch than it's costing us just to offer school meals to everyone.

And kids not going hungry are kids who learn better, they behave better, it ultimately saves the system. But there are other things that we have done that are simply about spending. They're nice-to-haves. Look, I'm a person who understands budgets. I'm a single mom. I hear from my teenage daughter all the time that she needs stuff, and we have conversations about the difference between needs and wants, and I think we do need to have some real thought about what are our top priorities.

What are the things in this budget moment that if we do not do become catastrophically more expensive to do in the future? And what's the stuff that if we kick it a year, Larry, that we can do it the next year, right? And there are things in that category, and that's how I would go about analyzing things.

On questions of her temperament

Mantle: In closing, I wanted to ask you about what's hung over your campaign from early on, and those are questions about your temperament with a couple of videotaped incidents that were released, questions as to whether you are hotheaded, so to speak.

Your personal life has come up with allegations that there'd been volatility in those relationships. How do you respond to people who are asking themselves about your temperament, whether it's suited for a governor of California?

Porter: So I would say that I've been thinking about this a lot, and I cannot think of a time that word temperament has ever been used with regard to a male candidate.

I heard about this with Hillary, I heard about this with Kamala, we heard about this with Amy Klobuchar, with Elizabeth Warren, with a lot of strong women. I think the reality is everybody should be accountable for their mistakes. I have taken accountability for my mistakes. I have addressed these issues hundreds of times in this campaign, and I think it's a real contrast to how some other candidates have handled questions about their past decisions and their outcomes.

We saw other candidates sometimes say that, "Oh, you're asking me about that, that's just a MAGA talking point. That's just a hoax."

I haven't done that. I've admitted that there have been times in my life where I've fallen short, where I needed to do better, and I have demonstrated in this campaign, in every single debate, in every forum, in every press interview. Three dozen or so of my staffers wrote a letter an open letter describing what I'm like to work with what it's like to be part of my team, and why it meant so much to them to have that experience.

So I think these are, at their core, allegations that only fall onto women. And look, Larry, it's not lost on me the last time Democrats had a really competitive woman candidate for governor was 1994 and that was 30-plus years ago.

And so I think we are seeing other states, Virginia, New Mexico, Oregon, New Jersey, Michigan, elect women governors. And what are they getting as a result? They're getting great outcomes in their state. They're getting thoughtful leadership. And that's what I'm running to offer to the state of California.

What makes her uniquely suited for the job

Mantle: I do just have to say there are male candidates who there are questions, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, here in California the Burtons, Sheriff Villanueva in L.A. County. I could come up with a pretty long list of men whose temperaments have been questioned when they've been candidates. But by and large you're saying you, you still feel there's been a double standard in how you've been treated.

But my final question for you, just I'm asking this of all the candidates, what is it about you personally, temperamentally, intellectually? What is it about you, aside from what you've done, aside from your professional expertise, what is it about you as a person that you think makes you well-suited to this job?

Porter: Because I'm the candidate in this race who every day is really confronting what is the future gonna be like for the next generation of Californians. I'm confronting that as a single mom who pushes the shopping cart, who knows the price of everything in the grocery store. I'm the one driving a minivan with 180,000 miles on it, not a Rivian, right?

I'm the one who's thinking about can my kids afford to go to college here? Will they get into our state university system? Will AI take their jobs? And so I have a lot of respect for the other candidates in this race. I think it's important to say that, but the reality is no billionaire and no 35, 37-year career politician has the perspective that I have on what is it going to mean to grow up in California and to enter into college and to come out into the job market today that I have as a single mom of three teenagers, that I have as an educator on our college campuses.

Mantle: Thank you so much for being with us, Katie Porter. We appreciate you joining us as part of these conversations with candidates for governor of California.

Porter: Thank you.

This transcript has been edited for length and clarity.