Gavin Newsom’s California in ‘Existential Freefall’ Victor Davis Hanson

March 18, 2025 

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos.

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, as I had mentioned earlier, has had a series of podcast interviews and he’s selected conservatives. Charlie Kirk, Michael Savage, and others have been meeting with him.

Steve Bannon was the most recent and they’re asking him a series of questions, but none of them seem to really get to the heart of the matter. And that is to ask Gov. Newsom why this state is a dysfunctional and unsustainable project.

I’m not talking just about the $100 to $200 billion high-speed rail debacle. I’m not even talking about Gov. Newsom’s blowing up of four dams on the Klamath River. Took about a quarter of $1 trillion that he took out of a bond measures fund to do what? To build reservoirs.

I’m not even talking about his cancellation or delaying of three reservoirs— Los Banos Grande, the Sites Reservoir, and Temperance Flat—which would have given us, in a year like this, where we have ample rainfall and snowmelt, about 5 million acre-feet of storage, which would have come in handy in August.

I’m not talking about any of that. I’m talking about the more dire catastrophes.

Right now, the state started the year 2024 $76 billion in debt. We have the highest income tax rate at 13.3. We have the highest gas taxes at nearly 70 cents a gallon. We have among the highest sales taxes, property taxes.

But here’s my question. Right now, Gov. Newsom, half of all births in California are covered by Medi-Cal. We have spent almost $11 billion on indigent aid, mostly for people who are here illegally. You are now broke. Even that was not enough. You are asking to borrow $3.4 billion from the general fund, which was in arrears, to pay for the health care of people who were largely allowed to come into California illegally. More importantly, in addition to that, almost 20% of all the people who are PG&E—Pacific Gas and Electric—users have not paid their bills. It’s a fantastic multibillion-dollar shortfall. What is your plan to address that?

Pam Bondi Fires Warning Shot Over Women’s Sports

 Mary Margaret Olohan, 02/25/25,  DailyWire.com

Attorney General Pam Bondi [pictured right] ... issued letters to officials in Maine, Minnesota, and California following pushback from left-wing lawmakers and state officials who have refused to comply with the president’s executive order banning men from women’s sports and spaces.

“This Department of Justice will defend women and does not tolerate state officials who ignore federal law,” Bondi said Tuesday. “We will leverage every legal option necessary to ensure state compliance with federal law and President Trump’s Executive Order protecting women’s sports.”

Her letter reminds these officials that Trump’s executive order states that allowing men and boys to compete in women’s and girls’ sports is “demeaning, unfair, and dangerous to women and girls.”

Commentary: Defensive Gun Uses Show Faulty Premise of California Gun Laws

 Amy Swearer | Grace McNabnay | February 18, 2025

As wildfires raged last month in California, tens of thousands of people were forced to flee their homes, often with just minutes of warning. To make matters worse, looters took advantage of the chaos and lack of police resources, showing up in droves to ransack evacuated areas—sometimes as helpless residents looked on in horror as their doorbell cameras captured the looting in real time.

Fortunately for residents of at least some evacuated areas, a handful of their armed neighbors stayed behind to protect their homes and livelihoods from would-be looters—in some cases, bravely patrolling their streets with firearms in what certainly seemed to be open defiance of the state’s public carry laws.

But for countless others, the state’s restrictive gun laws undoubtedly complicated their ability to defend their homes, at the very least compounding their anxiety by raising questions about their legal rights in a state notorious for treating lawful gun owners as the enemy of public safety. Barriers like mandatory waiting periods, meanwhile, ensured that Californians who didn’t already own guns would be kept from exercising one of their most fundamental rights precisely when it mattered most. 

California: Plaintiffs Appeal Dismissal of Assisted Suicide Lawsuit Under the ADA and US Constitution

Diane Coleman, President and CEO of  NDY (Not Dead Yet) [pictured right]

* * *

Today, the 34th Anniversary of the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is the the perfect day for an update on the groundbreaking lawsuit, United Spinal v. California, which challenges the California assisted suicide law as violations of the ADA and the U.S. Constitution's Due Process and Equal Protection provisions. The federal District Court dismissed the lawsuit in the spring and plaintiffs promptly gave notice that we would appeal. This week, United Spinal Association, Not Dead Yet and the other plaintiffs filed our appeal. Here is the press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Disability Organizations and Individuals Partner to Appeal the Deadly and Discriminatory Public Policy of Physician-Assisted Suicide California Law Unlawful and Unconstitutional

LOS ANGELES, CA — [7/24/24] — Today, the United Spinal Association (“United Spinal”), Not Dead Yet (“NDY”), Institute for Patients’ Rights (“IPR”), Communities Actively Living Independent & Free (“CALIF”), and individual plaintiffs, Lonnie VanHook and Ingrid Tischer, filed an appeal to the 9th Circuit following the recent dismissal of their lawsuit challenging California’s End of Life Option Act (EOLOA). The current state law permits physicians to prescribe lethal drugs to suicidal patients and has weakened many of the safeguards in the original law, fast-tracking death by suicide within 48 hours. The EOLOA, by design, remains unregulated by any California public entity, leaving patients and their loved ones at grave risk of harm and without recourse.

California’s New Assisted Suicide Law: Whose Choice Will it Be?

https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2015/10/margaret-dore-physician-assisted-suicide

Senator Blakespear Removes Bill Expanding Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia

Senator Catherine Blakespear has removed proposed Senate Bill 1196, seeking to expand assisted suicide and euthanasia in California, from consideration prior to its first hearing.  

"At this point, there is a reluctance from many around me to take up this discussion, and the future is unclear,” Blakespear said in a statement. “The topic, however, remains of great interest to me and to those who have supported this bill thus far.”

Senator Susan Eggman, who authored the original act in 2016, commented that pushing forward now would create a risk of pushback. She stated:

While I have compassion for those desiring further change, pushing for too much too soon puts CA [California] & the country at risk of losing the gains we have made for personal autonomy....

Senator Eggman on SB 1196

"My thoughts on SB 1196 to expand the End of Life Option Act. I do not support this expansion. While I have compassion for those desiring further change, pushing for too much too soon puts [California and]  the country at risk of losing the gains we have made for personal autonomy."

Stephen Mendelsohn (pictured here): "Meaning she supports further expansion, just not this much this fast if it will cause a backlash and help our side."

Proposed Bill Blows the Eligibility for Assisted Suicide Wide Open

By Diane Coleman, JD, President & CEO.  (pictured here).

This letter is filed on behalf of Not Dead Yet, a national disability organization headquartered in New York with members in California. We oppose the SB 1196 amendments to the California End of Life Option Act for several reasons.

ELIGIBILITY: First and most importantly, the proposed amendments provide for a greatly expanded eligibility for receiving a lethal prescription, removing the current provision based on a “terminal” diagnosis expected to lead to a natural death within six months. The SB 1196 amendment makes millions more people eligible, people with chronic conditions and disabilities who are nowhere near the “end of life” except for their proposed eligibility for assisted suicide.

A Short History of Assisted Suicide; Is Canadian Style Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia Coming to California?

By Diane Coleman 

A California State Senator, Catherine Blakespear, introduced a bill (SB 1196) earlier this month that resembles Canada’s law and, here in the U.S., reflects the broad agenda openly espoused by the Hemlock Society and Final Exit Network. The agenda of these organizations has long included eligibility for people with non-terminal conditions and disabilities.

When Not Dead Yet activists joined me in attending Jack “Dr. Death” Kevorkian’s trial in the late 1990s, Hemlock’s executive director Faye Girsh was there supporting him. Two thirds of his body count consisted of people with non-terminal disabilities. Girsh also advocated eligibility for people with cognitive disabilities and dementia, with or without consent. Leaders also advocated active euthanasia and “mercy killing.”

Amendments Seek to Weaken Patient Protections, Attestation Provisions Also Eliminated

 

By Margaret Dore, Esq.

On February 10, 2021, assisted suicide/euthanasia proponents introduced a bill seeking to amend California's End of Life Option Act. The bill, SB 380,  eliminates the Act's 2026 sunset date, and also allows a 15 day waiting period to be shortened to 48 hours in certain circumstances.[1]

Katy Grimes, editor of the California Globe (pictured), had this to say:

When it comes to carrying out the death penalty for convicted murders, the California Legislature finds the lethal drug cocktails "cruel and unusual punishment," which they say is a violation of the Eighth Amendment. Yet lawmakers were more than willing to approve a lethal drug cocktail to allow sick people to kill themselves.  I wrote [this] in 2015 as the California Legislature was considering [passage of the Act].[2]

The proposed amendments also eliminate the Act's "attestation" provisions.[3]

A hearing on SB 380 is set for May 10, 2021. This may be subject to change. 

Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia Law Back in Effect

http://www.kvoa.com/story/38440384/court-reinstates-doctor-assisted-suicide-in-california

A state appeals court has reinstated — at least for now — California's law allowing terminally ill people to end their lives.

The Fourth District Court of Appeals in Riverside issued an immediate stay Friday putting the End of Life Option back into effect. The court also gave opponents of its decision until July 2 to file objections.

Judge Ottolia Rejects Motion to Vacate Order Invalidating Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia Law

Judge Daniel Ottolia has rejected a motion to vacate his decision overturning the deceptively named, "End of Life Options Act." The act remains null and void. For more information, click here  

Assisted Suicide Law is Unconstitutional; Decision Upheld by Appeals Court

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Last week, Riverside Superior Court Judge, Daniel Ottolia, overturned California's assisted suicide law when he ruled that the legislature acted outside the scope of its authority [when enacting it]

California passed the state's assisted suicide law in a special health care funding session after the legislature failed to pass the assisted suicide bill in its normal session.

Judge Ottolia, held that "the End of Life Option Act [legalizing assisted suicide] does not fall within the scope of access to healthcare services," and that it "is not a matter of health care funding."

Stephanie Packer Denied Life Saving Drugs

Ms. Packer

After the End of Life Option Act was implemented, Stephanie’s insurance company denied coverage of life-saving chemotherapy treatment, but said it would pay for “aid-in-dying” drugs, which would cost $1.20.

Stephanie has spoken out against assisted suicide in California and other states, saying, “I am so grateful that California’s assisted suicide law was overturned today. The bill’s proponents tout dignity, choice, compassion, and painlessness. I am here to tell you that nothing could be further from the truth. Choice is really an illusion for a very few. For too many, assisted suicide will be the only affordable ‘treatment’ that is offered them.”