For Clients & Friends of The Gualco Group, Inc.
IN THIS ISSUE – “It’s a chain reaction and nobody is paying any attention.”
New Jersey trucker on impact of California independent contractor law
POLITICS
- Newsom Goes to Washington; POTUS Speculation Spikes
- For Legislators, Summer Recess = Junkets
- Despite Unprecedented Power, Democrat Issues Become Ballot Propositions
- Independent Voters Difficult to Motivate in Primary Elections
CALIFORNIA TRENDING…
- Facebook is a Home for ABC…Anywhere But California
- Key California Economic Sector – Shipping, Trucking, Warehousing – Stalling
- Truckers Jam Port Traffic As Nation Watches CA Independent Contractor Law Roll Out
Capital News & Notes (CN&N) harvests California policy, legislative and regulatory insights from dozens of media and official sources for the past week. Please feel free to forward this unique client service.
FOR THE WEEK ENDING JULY 15, 2022
Mr. Newsom Goes to Washington; POTUS Speculation Spikes
Associated Press
As California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom heads to Washington this week, speculation about his national political ambitions won’t be far behind.
The four-day swing, anchored to an award Newsom will receive on behalf of his home state Wednesday from an education group, will provide the Democratic governor with a national stage to continue his outspoken defense of abortion rights and gun restrictions.
It comes at a time when he has been picking fights with Republican governors in Texas and Florida and holding up California as a sanctuary for what he calls fundamental rights, including same-sex marriage, freedom of speech and abortion.
Newsom’s recent activities have stoked talk about his White House ambitions as President Joe Biden’s popularity tumbles and some Democrats question the president’s viability for 2024. Newsom, a former San Francisco mayor, has dismissed any interest in the presidency, and Biden has said he’s planning to run for reelection.
“This is Gavin Newsom building his national brand for whatever opportunities might come up in the future,” said Thad Kousser, a political science professor at the University of California, San Diego.
“He’s savvy enough to know a lot of dominoes would have to fall for his future to come in 2024, but that makes it even more vital to take every opportunity to stay in the national consciousness for 2028” and beyond, Kousser added.
On his trip, Newsom is scheduled to meet with Biden administration officials, congressional leaders and members of the California delegation to discuss abortion access, gun control and climate change.
He will also be accepting an award from the Education Commission of the States that recognizes, among other things, that California is on track to establish universal pre-K classes for all 4-year-olds by 2025. Newsom spokesperson Erin Mellon said that “what is happening on the education front reflects what we’re seeing across the country – restricting rights and freedoms.”
“While red states are limiting the choices of parents and students – banning books, limiting speech in the classrooms, and persecuting families with transgender youth — California is prioritizing freedom and choice,” she said in a statement.
The 54-year-old governor has acknowledged he’s hoping that issues like abortion rights will mobilize Democratic voters in a challenging midterm election year, when the president’s party typically loses seats in Congress.
After easily beating back a recall election last year and facing only token oppositionin his bid for a second term in November, Newsom has sought out the national spotlight in recent months, blaming his own party for being too passive in the face of federal court decisions and new laws in Republican-led states that he said are eroding long-settled rights and rewriting what it means to be an American.
For Legislators, Summer Recess = Junkets
CalMatters
Speaking of summer recess, what exactly do state lawmakers do when they aren’t in Sacramento? A common activity is embarking on trips funded not by taxpayers, but by special interests that lobby the Legislature — typically a combination of labor unions, corporations and trade associations.
For example, after finishing the legislative session last year, groups of lawmakers jetted off to Portugal and Maui on trips sponsored by various interest groups. Another delegation of lawmakers went to Iceland this spring.
Here’s a look at what some groups are up to this summer:
- The California Legislative Irish Caucus is headed to Ireland on Sunday,Cunningham told me during our Wednesday conversation. He said he hadn’t yet looked at the itinerary, but he thinks the pharmaceutical industry, which is prominent in Ireland, is a sponsor. “If you want to form good relationships, especially with people you don’t normally socialize with in Sacramento — which is an important part of being effective at the job — these trips are a venue for that,” he said. “The ones I’ve gone to over the years are super educational. … And so there is, I would argue, a public benefit to a lot of these as well.”
- More information was not immediately available, but Assemblymember Patrick O’Donnell, a Long Beach Democrat, told me in a statement:“As the co-chair of the California Legislative Irish Caucus, I am proud to be participating in a bipartisan delegation trip to strengthen our cultural and economic relationship with Ireland. Ireland is one of the United States’ closest allies and economic partners. California and Ireland have many common industries such as pharmaceuticals, technology and film. I am proud to join my colleagues on this important trip to improve our trading relationships and expand business opportunities between Ireland and the Golden State. No taxpayer funds are being used for this trip.”
- Another group of lawmakers is currently in Israel.Further details were not immediately available, but Erin Ivie, communications director for Democratic Assemblymember Buffy Wicks of Oakland, said Wicks and a “handful of state legislators” are set to return to California today.
Despite Unprecedented Power, Democrat Issues Become Ballot Propositions
CalMatters commentary from Dan Walters
Democrats hold all of the positions of political power in California.
They have the governorship, both U.S. Senate seats and all statewide offices. Democrats also occupy three-quarters of the Legislature’s 120 seats and a like portion of the state’s congressional seats.
In theory, they could enact just about every policy or program they and their allies, such as labor unions and environmental and consumer advocates, would desire.
Strangely, however, most of the seven ballot measures that are being placed before voters this year are sponsored by interest groups that Democrats generally support.
That was demonstrated over the weekend when the state Democratic Party endorsed four of the seven. The ballot would have been even more loaded with ballot measures sponsored by Democratic allies but two — one dealing with medical malpractice damages, the other with plastics — were withdrawn after the contending interests reached compromises on replacement legislation.
The four measures receiving California Democratic Party endorsements:
—Proposition 1, a constitutional amendment to bolster the right to abortion, hurriedly placed on the ballot by Democratic legislators after the U.S. Supreme Court reversed its Roe v. Wade ruling on abortion rights;
—Proposition 28, which guarantees more financing for arts and music education in the public schools;
—Proposition 29, the third effort by unions to increase staffing requirements for kidney dialysis clinics;
—Proposition 30, a tax increase on those reporting $2 million or more in income to provide funds for infrastructure supporting zero-emission vehicles.
The abortion rights measure had to go on the ballot because constitutional amendments must receive voter approval, but the other three gaining party endorsements could have been enacted by the Legislature. Taking them to the ballot is another indication that despite Democratic hegemony in the Capitol, internal ideological fault lines often make it difficult, and perhaps impossible, for the party’s allies to have their way.
Only one of the seven measures could be said to have come from the right. Proposition 31 is a referendum sponsored by the tobacco industry to overturn a 2020 state law banning flavored tobacco products. The party opposed the industry’s effort by endorsing a “yes” vote on the measure, which would ratify the law.
That leaves the two competing sports wagering measures, Propositions 26 and 27. The former is sponsored by some Indian tribes that own casinos and would allow sports betting only within casinos or at a few horseracing tracks.
After it qualified for the ballot, a coalition of big on-line sports wagering operations, led by DraftKings, FanDuel and BetMGM, hustled to place a rival measure on the ballot to sanction on-line bets, promising that taxes would support mental illness and homeless programs.
The party opposed Proposition 27, the on-line measure, but could not agree on a Proposition 26 position and declared neutrality. Although the tribal measure has received widespread support from local and regional Democratic Party groups, there’s a tactical division among the tribes, with some even backing Proposition 27.
The fact that sports wagering became a very expensive ballot battle, with more than $300 million already committed for campaigns for and against the rival measures, also testifies to the limits of the Capitol’s ability to resolve issues.
Casino-owning tribes have been closely allied with Democrats for several decades as they bootstrapped their way into a monopoly on casino gambling in the state. However they could not gain legislative approval for extending their monopoly into sports wagers. Finally, after the issue had kicked around the Capitol for several years without resolution, Proposition 26’s tribal coalition decided to take it to voters.
Independent Voters Difficult to Motivate in Primary Elections
Sacramento Bee
Only 18% of the 6.4 million Californians who are registered Independent, third-party or without a preference voted in the June 7 primary, according to Political Data, which tracks voter trends. That’s compared to 28% of Democrats and 30% of Republicans, Political Data counts as of July 11 show. The results demonstrate again that primary candidates who hitch their fortunes to Independent voters, like Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert in her unsuccessful campaign for California attorney general, do so at their peril.
“The preliminary races aren’t that important, and they’ve proven it over and over again: Republicans and Democrats both are far more likely to turn out for a primary than Independents,” Republican consultant Matt Rexroad said in an interview. Rexroad and others theorize that many no-party-preference voters actually prefer Democrats or Republicans, not Independent candidates, and thus would reliably vote for one party over another. A 2021 study by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) found that “Independent-likely voters have been somewhat more likely to lean Democratic (52%) than Republican (26%); 12% did not lean toward either party.” Almost half of California voters are Democrats; the other half are split almost evenly between Republicans and others, according to the PPIC. Rexroad and Democratic consultant Andrew Acosta pointed to Schubert’s campaign as Exhibit A for the difficulty in getting the Independent or no-party-preference vote. Had Schubert won, it would have been a first in modern California.
Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, and Republican challenger Nathan Hochman, a former U.S. assistant attorney general, advanced to the November election. Schubert finished behind another Republican. “That’s what I never understood about the Anne Marie Schubert equation, which was, ‘Okay, these people don’t show up,’” Rexroad said. “What’s going to drive them to show up this time differently than they have in every other primary election you’ve ever had?” Acosta said that while no-party preference voters “don’t move in mass,” many of them distrust politicians. Swinging their vote requires “nuanced messaging.”
“They don’t believe anything you tell them,” Acosta said. “You tell them, ‘The sky is blue today.’ They’re like, ‘Really? I don’t know.’ They’re grumpy. They don’t believe what politicians are saying. Many of them are Independent for a reason. At the moment, I would have a hard time saying the path to victory is through no-party-preference voters. But we’ll see.” All the state’s primaries since 2012 have been “jungle” style — with candidates from all parties on the same ballot for most races. The top two vote-getters regardless of party go on to the general election rather than political parties having separate primaries and meeting in November, as happens in most states. The idea, supported by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, was to attract more moderate candidates and minimize partisanship.
Overall turnout from the 2022 primary matches that of pre-jungle gubernatorial primaries in 2006 and 2010, according to California’s Secretary of State. No party preference voters “are going to vote either Republican or Democrat in the general election, so they’re really not in the equivalent of primaries,” Rexroad said. “I know that we don’t have a ‘pure primary system’ in California, or we don’t have partisan nominees, but they’re more interested in the finals.” MORE VOTE IN NOVEMBER All active registered voters in the state were mailed ballots this year. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed that provision into law in 2021 to boost accessibility. Ballots could be mailed, dropped off at a ballot box or handed in at a voting site or election office. People could vote in-person, even registering to vote when walking into a center on Election Day.
But overall turnout was low. Just over 33% of voters returned a ballot, according to counts by the Secretary of State as of July 7 — the lowest it has been since the 2014 primary.
(Turnout was somewhat higher in Sacramento County — 38.88% of registered voters, the second-highest turnout during a gubernatorial primary since 2002, according to final election results. Only 2018 saw a higher turnout, when 41.94% of local voters turned out.) Of the nearly 22 million ballots given to voters, over 5.5 million were returned for this primary election, according to the Political Data estimates. California’s 2022 political season closely resembles 2014: the midterm of a Democratic president (Barack Obama) and a gimme-victory for an incumbent governor. That year-Gov. Jerry Brown skated to re-election, as Gov. Gavin Newsom is expected to this year. But the comparison is flawed, said Political Data vice president Paul Mitchell. There were more voters in this gubernatorial primary than any previous one. “We’re kind of dinging the state for having such effective voter registration,” Mitchell said in an interview. “The state has registered 22 million voters whereas in 2014 there were only 17 million voters. Now the percentage turnout looks like it’s going down.” Lack of competitiveness at the top of the ticket could cause some voters to stay home, particularly Democrats who know that their blue-state incumbents are safe. If history is any guide, November will be rough for the party holding the White House. President Joe Biden’s sagging approval rating has many analysts pointing to a nationwide “red wave” that will hand control of the House to the GOP in 2023. Still, more people will punch their tickets in November than did in June. “Part of what will naturally happen is the general will have more excitement,” Mitchell said. “The general is more nationalized because all the states are having their general at the same time, so no matter what media outlets you are on, you’re going to see stuff about the election.” Mitchell said turnout in November will be driven by what the national political climate is focused on, such as inflation, gas prices and abortion. “I would expect that the turnout for Independents, young voters and Latinos — as has always happened — to increase for the general election,” he said. “It’s just a question of how much it will.”
Facebook is a Home for ABC…Anywhere But California
Sacramento Bee
Hundreds of thousands of residents have fled California for other states during the pandemic and most of them seem to have found a virtual home on one of Terry Gilliam’s Facebook pages. His groups – Leaving California and Life After California – have a combined membership of nearly 240,000, a number that has doubled in the past six months alone. The groups have created an online community for California refugees. They seek advice on where and how to move: Has anyone used a storage hauler they like? How’s the weather in Tampa? How much does it cost to a buy a home in Boise? Gilliam started Leaving California in 2018 and the other page about a year later. He has since left his home in the East Bay and moved to Orlando, Florida.
“I was hoping to have a thousand members, but obviously I struck a nerve,” he said. “I have no animosity toward people who live in California. I just want to help people who are looking for a better life.” More than 1 million people have likely fled California for other states since the pandemic began, including nearly 700,000 who left in 2020 alone, according to a Sacramento Bee analysis of census data. The net loss to other states was about 430,000 from April 2020 through July 2021, the data show. The two states with the largest net gains of California refugees in 2020 – Texas and Arizona – are dominated by conservative political views, as are many of the states where members of the Facebook groups land.
It’s a startling reversal of California’s almost mythical appeal that attracted millions of new residents for more than a century, from Gold Rush speculators to tech entrepreneurs. “Everyone loves the beauty and the weather,” Gilliam said, “but if you can’t pay your bills, you’re never going to live a comfortable life.” Some say they left California because of persistent wildfires, COVID-19 restrictions, traffic and an exploding homeless population. Others worried their children wouldn’t be able to afford a home here or that retirement was becoming out of reach.
And a whole lot just don’t like Gov. Gavin Newsom. For many, the decision to flee is a combination of social issues and a lack of confidence that political leadership can improve them. Gary Cable grew up in West Sacramento and loved the beauty of the Bay Area, Lake Tahoe and the Sacramento River. He vacationed in Hawaii for 15 years and every time he returned home to California, he said he was struck by “the dirt and the filth on the street.” “When you drive the streets of Sacramento now and you see the garbage and the tent cities, to me it’s depressing,” he said. “I don’t know where it went wrong and what happened, but somebody’s not doing their job.”
Hawaii isn’t typically a top destination for California refugees; you’re more likely to come across someone on Gilliam’s pages talking about a move to Montana or South Dakota. Texas gained the most people from California in 2020. About 84,300 people left California for Texas, compared to 34,400 who came from Texas to California. Arizona was close behind, gaining 64,000 former California residents and losing 23,000 to California, for a net gain of about 41,000. Oregon, Idaho, Colorado, Washington, Tennessee, New Jersey and Florida each saw a net gain of at least 8,000 residents from California. Gilliam says he’s hearing more and more about people heading to Tennessee, and that “Arkansas, Alabama, Mississippi and Kentucky are sleepers now.”
“You can buy a big house on a big plot of land there,” he said.
Of course, there’s a give and take. That first tornado warning or stretch of humid weather can be jarring for those used to California weather. Some members of the Facebook groups talk about missing loved ones or worrying about moving into a home sight unseen in a town they have barely heard of. But for every regret, there is far more chatter about cheaper gas, friendlier neighbors and more affordable housing, Gilliam said.
“I see a lot of people saying, ‘Don’t let your fears keep you from moving,’” Gilliam said. Katie Mitchell and her family considered moving to eight different states before settling on a suburb of Des Moines, Iowa. They had spent six years living in the tiny town of Mount Baldy, about 45 miles northeast of Los Angeles in the San Gabriel Mountains, “a beautiful area with a wonderful community.” Then the pandemic hit. And another summer of fires and smoke. “(The) cost of living, wildfires, overcrowding and government overreach are some of the biggest factors, but there are many more,” she said of their motivation to pack up. Pandemic closures and classroom restrictions at their schools also played a role. The morning of their move, they awoke at 5 a.m. to smoke and wind in the air. “In general, when we miss California, it is a place that no longer exists,” she said. “We will just have to stay in our old mountain town and eat In-N-Out when we visit.” Gilliam’s Facebook pages have been adding between 650 and 750 new members per day since mid-June. He’s hired two staffers who accept new member requests, approve posts to the pages and moderate the comments (which are predominantly friendly). “I try not to allow too much California bashing,” Gilliam said. Gilliam isn’t quite sure why his pages have had another surge of new members the past few weeks. It could be a post-election reaction to most of the state’s top leaders winning another term in office. Maybe it’s the gas tax. Then again, there’s often a common culprit. “Every time Governor Newsom opens his mouth,” he said, “we get another thousand members.”
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article263363228.html#storylink=cpy
Key California Economic Sector – Shipping, Trucking, Warehousing – Stalling
CalMatters commentary from Dan Walters
As California’s post-World War II industrial economy slumped during the 1970s, civic and business leaders in the state’s two major metropolitan areas made some momentous bets on their economic futures.
While the San Francisco Bay Area opted for the emerging sector of digital technology, Southern California — Los Angeles particularly — believed that its future lay in logistics, tying the region to the fast-growing economies of Asia.
Southern California expanded and modernized its twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to handle what became a flood of container ships from China and other Asian nations. Rail and highway connections were improved and the region’s “Inland Empire” became a massive logistics center of warehouses and distribution centers serving the entire nation.
It’s estimated that 40% of U.S. imports and 25% of the nation’s exports pass through Southern California’s ports.
Although logistics industry salaries are not high in comparison to those of the Bay Area’s tech industry, its warehouses and other facilities have provided much-needed jobs for the wave of immigrants, mostly from Latin America, that Southern California experienced in the 1980s and 1990s.
However, despite its importance, Southern California’s logistics industry faces an uncertain future as the movement of goods becomes increasingly competitive and, as industry leaders complain, new state laws and regulations raise operational costs that could encourage shippers to go elsewhere.
As shipping volume increased in recent years, new Inland Empire warehouses proliferated to handle the traffic, creating a backlash of opposition from local residents and environmental groups.
Business groups have opposed the measure, saying that its setback requirements and a provision of the bill requiring unionized labor on warehouse projects would hamstring development of facilities needed to handle ever-increasing amounts of cargo. The bill has passed the Assembly and is pending in the Senate.
Meanwhile, John McLaurin, president of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association, told Gov. Gavin Newsom in a letter last month that several new state policies also threaten to curtail the logistics industry’s ability to handle increasing amounts of cargo.
He specifically cited new rules from the California Air Resources Board that prohibit older trucks from handling cargo at the ports and require replacement trucks to be zero-emission vehicles “that are currently unavailable due to the shortage of semi conductors and other equipment.”
McLaurin also noted that while a just-passed state budget trailer bill purports to “invest in port-specific high-priority projects that increase goods movement capacity on rail and roadways serving ports and at port terminals,” it also bans spending for “fully automated cargo handling equipment.”
The prohibition is supposedly aimed at protecting port jobs from being automated but McLaurin told Newsom that unions have already agreed to provisions allowing automation, which is needed to keep Los Angeles and Long Beach ports competitive in the battle for shipping business vis-à-vis other ports.
“California’s ports have no more room to grow — except up,” McLaurin said. “If we are to meet the needs of California consumers and exporters, support hundreds of thousands of supply chain related jobs and function as a competitive gateway, innovation along the waterfront should be encouraged — not stifled.”
These issues are a warning that as logistics have become so important to Southern California’s economy, the industry’s future should not be taken for granted.
https://calmatters.org/commentary/2022/07/southern-cal-ports-and-warehouses-face-threats/
Truckers Jam Port Traffic As Nation Watches CA Independent Contractor Law Roll Out
Bloomberg
News Item: A group of truckers protesting a state law limiting the use of independent-contractor drivers held a convoy protest through the Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex on Wednesday, snarling some traffic in the area. The convoy of dozens of trucks dramatically slowed traffic on the northbound 110, but the route remained open, according to the California Highway Patrol. The convoy was part of what is believed to be an anticipated 24-hour work stoppage.
About 70,000 truck owner-operators who form the bedrock of California’s transport industry are in limbo as state-level labor rules start applying to them, creating another choke point in stressed US supply chains.
Almost a dozen truckers told Bloomberg News they’re unsure how to comply with California’s Assembly Bill 5, which requires workers satisfy a three-part test to be considered independent contractors, or else be seen as employees entitled to job benefits. The trucking industry relies on contractors — who until now have had flexibility to operate on their own terms — and has fought to be exempt from state regulations for years.
California truck owner-operators must now comply with AB5 after the Supreme Court on June 30 refused to review a case challenging the legislation that sets out the tests for employment-status classification.
The California Trucking Association, which brought that challenge, estimates the law may push thousands of independent truckers off the road while they take the necessary steps to comply with the new regulations.
More than 70% of truckers serving some of the country’s largest ports — including Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland — are owner-operators, and AB5 will govern their relationships with carriers, brokers and shippers in most cases, according to the CTA.
The law comes into effect for truckers in the busiest months of the year as retailers stock up on back-to-school and holiday goods. At the same time, dockworkers and railroad workers are currently negotiating contracts with their respective employers. Additional transportation snarls would only worsen pandemic-era supply-chain chaos and add to inflationary pressures, threatening to slow economic growth.
“This denial couldn’t have come at a worse time,” said Eric Sauer, senior vice president for government affairs at the CTA. “We’re in peak harvest season. We’re also in peak construction season. And this is the time for peak holiday imports coming into the ports.”
“We have never gotten any good answers from anyone official in California on how this is supposed to be enforced or how our members can comply,” said Norita Taylor, the director of public relations at the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association.
The Port of Long Beach is monitoring the trucking situation as AB5 comes into effect. “We understand the capacity concerns at this very busy time for the port complex,” Deputy Executive Director Noel Hacegaba said.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration is looking forward to more detail and a plan of action from California, a White House official said.
Given the ambiguity on how AB5 will play out, it may force carriers to immediately downsize their contracted owner-operator fleets, or hire former owner-operators as company drivers effective July 7, said Kevin McMaster, vice president of carrier sales at Encinitas, California-based Flock Freight.
“This would cause a ripple effect in the industry, pushing many drivers who don’t want to apply for their own authority to lease out of state, likely in Arizona or Nevada, and even force some into retirement due to increased market pressures,” he said. “There will likely be pressure added on capacity in California that could exacerbate an already tough environment where drivers are at a premium.”
Matt Schrap, chief executive officer of the Long Beach, California-based Harbor Trucking Association, is projecting some level of capacity loss as drivers exit the marketplace because they don’t want to be employees, nor do they want to obtain their own operating authority.
The cost to transition from an owner-operator model may reach $20,000 annually as truckers file for the appropriate licenses and pay additional fees and insurance, Schrap said.
The best advice for independent drivers now is to “find a lawyer,” he said.
California passed the AB5 law in 2019, aiming at gig-economy giants including Uber, Lyft and DoorDash. But these companies won exemption, along with other professionals, including musicians, freelance writers and architects.
The trucking industry scored a temporary injunction that remained in place until last week’s Supreme Court decision.
The timing of the decision is “nothing new,” said former Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, the Democrat who proposed the bill. “They’ve known for the last two and a half years that it was equally possible that this injunction would not hold. This is not a shock.”
Still, some see in the law an opportunity to address longstanding pitfalls within the industry. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which represents about 1.2 million US and Canada workers mainly in trucking, says the law will avoid misclassification and will guarantee independent contractors are paid fair wages, benefits and employee-related fees.
“Over the last decade, the California Labor Commissioner found misclassification is rampant at our ports,” Randy Cammack, president of Teamsters Joint Council 42, said in a statement. “The race to the bottom in trucking is going to end.”
Since 2012, the California Labor Commissioner’s Office issued about 500 decisions finding that port trucking companies had misclassified drivers, ordering them to pay over $50 million to these workers.
“We’ll blame AB5 for everything that really is a result of decades of deregulation in the trucking industry,” Gonzalez said. “This is a constant bogeyman.”
Truckers in other states are looking closely at California as an example of what might come next for them, according to the CTA’s Sauer. “A lot of the laws and regulations that get adopted in California blow east,” he said.
Home to the second-largest port complex in the US, New York and New Jersey failed to pass similar bills during the pandemic, but both states have since taken steps to regulate independent contractors. Other states including Washington and Massachusetts have also proposed labor-regulation bills.
It’s “sad to see people don’t understand the severity of the situation,” said Edisson Villacis, president of the Elizabeth, New Jersey-based Port Driver Association. If anything, all the confusion in California is a cautionary tale. “It’s a chain reaction and nobody is paying any attention.”