What Trump's budget means for California, state looks to protect auto emissions standards, trouble for international tourists flocking to legal marijuana.
Trump's budget is like nothing since 'days of Ronald Reagan,' analyst says
President Donald Trump has unveiled his new budget blueprint, which aims to quantify the president's "America First" agenda in dollars and cents.
The plan calls for significant increases in military and border-security spending, along with cuts in other areas. Many of these cuts could have a major impact on California.
Ross DeVol, chief research officer at the Milken Institute, called the cuts “draconian,” saying they would disproportionately affect lower-income Californians, funding for disaster responses and state programs that help minorities pay for college.
“I haven’t seen anything like this out here since the early days of Ronald Reagan,” DeVol told KPCC.
One of the programs that could be hit hardest is a national college tuition assistance program, the “Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant,” DeVol said. The program, which is supported by federal funds that feed the state’s budget, could see its end in Trump’s budget cuts, he said.
The grant offers between $100 and $4,000 a year to students with financial need, according to the U.S. Department of Education. Many of those students happen to be Latinos and other minorities, DeVol said.
“This is a program that California has benefitted from,” he said. “I see this, longer term, as perhaps being the biggest negative impact in terms of cutting back on our seed capital.”
Trump’s proposed federal budget also ramps up military spending, and could contribute to aerospace research and development, drone and anti-cyber research, DeVol said.
“So, that’s the good news,” he said. “But in the short term, it’s hard to envision how this doesn’t negatively affect the state.”
Click the blue player button above to listen to the full interview.
California resists Trump's review of Obama fuel economy standards
With Detroit as his backdrop, President Trump promised to “make cars in America again." During the Wednesday event attended by chief executives from Ford, General Motors, Fiat Chrysler and Toyota, the president ordered a review of strict passenger vehicle fuel economy standards put in place during the Obama administration that required a fleetwide average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025.
"We want to be the car capital of the world again," Trump said during his speech at the American Center for Mobility. Michigan Governor Rick Snyder, United Auto Workers President Dennis Williams and hundreds of UAW members were also in attendance at the event, where Trump promised "common-sense changes" to federal fuel economy rules enacted during the Obama administration six years ago.
Trump said he is ordering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to reopen a review of the fuel economy standards. The Obama administration EPA chief had finalized a review of those standards just days before Trump took office -- well before its scheduled midterm review in 2018; she ordered them to remain in place through 2025. It's that review that Trump is asking to be re-reviewed in the hopes that relaxed fuel economy rules might spur U.S. job creation.
The state of California, which has long been able to enforce even tougher emissions standards than the U.S. government under the federal Clean Air Act, is preparing to defend the Obama standards. On Tuesday, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed a legal motion on the grounds that a weakening of federal fuel economy standards would hurt California's economy, its natural resources and its residents.
Weed-smoking tourist, caught between fed and state laws, gets barred from US
Sarah — who asked that we not use her real name for fear of jeopardizing her job — had been to the United States twice before. But in October 2015, after arriving at Los Angeles International Airport from Santiago, Chile, her conversation with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) was more probing than others she'd experienced.
She said that they began with the standard "Why are you here?" and "When was the last time you went to the U.S.?" But instead of letting her through, they moved her to another area and began searching her suitcase, clothes and cosmetics.
CBP was trying to figure out whether Sarah should be allowed into the country. She was trying to figure out why this time they were more suspicious than they'd been in the past.
As it turned out, Sarah had unwittingly stepped on the wrong side of the law during a trip to Colorado earlier that year when she smoked recreational marijuana — legal in that state.
The tourism industry in Colorado (and likely soon in California) heavily relies on tourists from around the U.S. and the world who come to take advantage of the state's liberal pot laws. But what those tourists sometimes don't understand is that there's a disparity between what state and federal laws allow — that it's easy to run afoul of federal drug laws and that those violations can have serious consequences, including being barred from the country.
Sarah's an example of a tourist caught in that confusing in-between.
At the time, Sarah didn't know why they were questioning her. She thought it might be because of how many times she'd been back and forth to the U.S., or where she'd gone. She still doesn't know what prompted the search.
A last-minute deal on a ticket from Santiago had her boarding a flight to Los Angeles to see her boyfriend, Neal. After her arrival in L.A., she was hoping to get on a bus and make her way to the Bay Area, where Neal lives. They'd been together for a few years, dating long distance, but they were in love and considering moving in together at some point.
"My first thought of him was like a crazy gringo," she said recently. "But... he has a kind of spirit that I really like."
They met while backpacking through the Ecuadorian jungle.
"The funny part is that Neal didn’t know how to talk or speak in Spanish very well," she said. "He was just practicing, learning. And I didn’t speak English before. So, it was a kind of awkward communication, but we match. You know, we could talk. We can align our feelings and everything. And I don’t know, everything started very quickly."
The two stayed in touch and started dating, their lengthy separations punctuated by short trips. Three months in Tennessee. Another three months in Colorado. And in October 2015, she planned a quick trip to San Francisco so that they could spend time together to talk about their future.
At the airport, a CBP officer dug through her belongings.
"Finally, he took my phone... He didn’t ask for permission," she said. "I didn’t have any password on my phone, so [he] just unlocked my phone and started to view everything inside of it. He viewed my messages, my contacts, my emails, my social media. He also viewed my pictures on my cell phone. And he was very interested in Colorado."
He asked her about why she'd gone there, where she stayed and what she did. While the officer was looking through her pictures, he came across images of glass pipes and jars of marijuana, taken inside of a recreational pot shop. He narrowed his inquiries, asking her where she'd taken the photos and whether she'd ever used cannabis.
"I said, yes. I tried marijuana in Colorado," she said. "I went to the store. I pass my passport to the store. They say to me, 'OK, no problem, you can go inside of the store, you can buy whatever you want to buy... and no problem. You are OK. Go to your home. Have fun.'"
He asked her if she'd ever used acid, mushrooms, cocaine or heroin, and whether she'd ever sold any illegal drugs. She said no.
She was then moved to another room and held for 15 hours. She missed her bus.
When officers came to get her, they told her that she was being denied entry to the U.S. and being sent back to Chile. She was also barred from returning indefinitely.
"As a foreign national admitting consumed drugs... it’s a reason for the U.S. to refuse your entry," said Jaime Ruiz, a spokesperson for CBP. When asked to comment on Sarah's case, he declined.
CBP was also unable to provide data related to the number of people turned away for violating federal marijuana laws.
When she'd smoked cannabis in Colorado, Sarah had unknowingly broken those federal laws, which classify marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance. Even though it's legal to consume recreational pot in Colorado, CBP follows federal, not state law. Under the Immigration and Naturalization Act, the penalty for consuming a controlled substance is denied entry.
Worried, Neal flew down to Santiago to meet Sarah, where they discussed their future. Over the coming months, they spoke with lawyers and immigration advocates, but they were told repeatedly that the likelihood of Sarah being able to overturn her ban was unlikely. To do so would require time, energy and, most importantly, money that they didn't have.
The prospect of an indefinite ban wore at them. In October 2016, the two split up.
"I really love Neal. He was amazing. We had an amazing relationship. Like it was almost perfect," Sarah reminisced. "Neal was very important for me, so I really want to see him again."
Sarah says she feels trapped. She can't visit friends in the U.S., and her job for a company based in the States could be put in jeopardy due to the fact that she can't visit headquarters. Now whenever she travels — even if it's not to the U.S. — authorities at the airport ask her why she's been banned from the country.
"I don’t know, I’m kind of tired of it. I just want to be free and go wherever I want without any concern. Without any worry," she said. "I just was doing what I thought it was legal."
Series: HighQ: Your California pot questions answered
This story is part of Take Two's look at California's burgeoning marijuana industry, with audience Q&As, explorations of personal narratives and an examination of how cannabis is changing the state.
Read more in this series, call or text us your questions at (929) 344-1948 or
Ex-LA County Sheriff Lee Baca found guilty in federal corruption scheme
Why do we continue to elect sheriffs instead of appointing them?
Obstructing justice and lying to federal officials. A jury convicted former L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca on Wednesday of crimes that could result in as much as 20 years in jail.
The whole Baca debacle has raised a basic question: why do we elect our sheriffs? Most police chiefs are appointed by mayors and city councils. But Sheriffs? They have to be law enforcement officials AND politicians. Does that even make sense?
For more, Jessica Levinson from Loyola Law School spoke to A Martinez. She broke down where the sheriff election system comes from, why it may never go away and how this system discourages diversity.
To listen to the full interview, click the blue play button above.
'Come West. California is hiring.' Public Utilities Commission recruits federal scientists
More now on the EPA, and the professionals working there.
The head of the agency says climate change is a farce.
And in his proposed budget, President Trump wants to cut EPA funding by almost one third.
So, it's no surprise that many climate scientists working for the Federal government are feeling a little edgy about their career prospects.
Here's a message for those scientists - "Come West. California is Hiring."
It comes from Michael Picker, president of the California Public Utilities Commission, and he delivered it in a pretty unusual way: by standing at Washington D.C. metro stops near the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency with fliers that contained info on climate change.
"I think it's partially a publicity and partially that they wouldn't mind filling a few dozen position," David Siders, senior reporter for Politico who specializes in California, told Take Two's A Martinez. "This really speaks more to Californians than it does to anyone in Washington."
Siders says that there is precedence for this sort of action. In fact, California was recently on the other side of the issue. "This mirrors how former Texas Governor Rick Perry used to come to California to recruit jobs," Siders said. "Really, what he was doing was speaking to his base back in Texas about his prowess. This really speaks more to Californians than it does to anyone in Washington."
To hear the full conversation, click the blue player above.