# Are We Addicted to Cars? The Case for Public Transport

An episode of [Switched On](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1469286286), 14 Feb 2024, 24 min.

Audio: https://podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/e73c998e-6e60-432f-8610-ae210140c5b1/01a10738-3608-4dec-883c-ae3c00026b36/2585ee17-e317-4013-9427-b116007d4d40/audio.mp3?utm_source=Podcast&in_playlist=6d114f63-833d-4b78-bbf5-ae3c00026b44

California has long been proactive when it comes to environmental policy, implementing measures ranging from a carbon market to put a price on emissions, to legislation to phase out the sale of new gasoline and diesel cars. But are current policies going far enough, and what can be done to ensure the state’s position as the climate leader in the US? On today’s show, we bring you an interview from our recent San Francisco Summit, where California State Senator Scott Wiener sat down with Corey Cantor, a Senior Associate in BloombergNEF’s Electric Vehicle team. Together they discuss California’s need for better public transportation alongside the shift to cleaner cars, the new law Wiener spearheaded on corporate emissions disclosure, and the potential impact of a Trump second term on the Golden State. Today’s episode was recorded live at BNEF's San Francisco Summit. To learn more about our Summits and to listen to more interviews, please visit https://about.bnef.com/summit/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

## Transcript

[0:00] Speaker 1: This is Dana Perkins and you're listening to Switched on
[0:03] Speaker 1: the BNAF podcast. On today's show, we bring you an
[0:07] Speaker 1: interview from B and EF's recent summit in San Francisco,
[0:10] Speaker 1: which took place on the thirtieth and thirty first of January.
[0:14] Speaker 1: On stage, we were joined by California State Senator from
[0:17] Speaker 1: the eleventh District, Scott Wiener, and he was interviewed by
[0:20] Speaker 1: Corey Cantor, a senior associate focused on electrified transport for
[0:25] Speaker 1: US at BNF. Since joining California Senate in twenty sixteen,
[0:29] Speaker 1: Wiener has introduced bills focused on net neutrality, solar energy
[0:33] Speaker 1: and storage, and the environment.
[0:35] Speaker 2: Now.
[0:35] Speaker 1: For decades, California has been proactive when it comes to
[0:38] Speaker 1: environmental policy, ranging from a carbon market to legislation to
[0:42] Speaker 1: reduce internal combustion engine sales. So today we hear from
[0:46] Speaker 1: a policy maker who is actively involved in shaping what
[0:49] Speaker 1: happens in California. Scott shares his views on public transportation.
[0:53] Speaker 1: With California leading the rest of the United States in
[0:56] Speaker 1: terms of electric vehicle ownership and charging infrastructure, has too
[1:00] Speaker 1: much focus been placed on automobiles and could a public
[1:03] Speaker 1: transportation network including a intercity high speed rail be in
[1:08] Speaker 1: the state's future. They also talk about legislation and the
[1:11] Speaker 1: impact of recent bills which would require corporate disclosure of
[1:15] Speaker 1: scope one to two to three emissions in addition to
[1:18] Speaker 1: disclosure of their climate risk. And since it is an
[1:21] Speaker 1: election year, no interview would be complete without hearing his
[1:24] Speaker 1: views on what the outcome of the US presidential election
[1:28] Speaker 1: would have on the state of California. For more information
[1:31] Speaker 1: about the six b and EF summits taking place in
[1:34] Speaker 1: cities around the world, and to see replays of some
[1:37] Speaker 1: of the b and EF talks and debates delivered at
[1:39] Speaker 1: our recent event in San Francisco, head to about dot BNF,
[1:43] Speaker 1: dot com Forward Slash Summit And now let's hear our
[1:47] Speaker 1: conversation with Senator Scott Wiener at the BNF Summit in
[1:51] Speaker 1: San Francisco, moderated by Corey Canter.
[2:03] Speaker 2: Really happy to have Senator Wiener with us here today
[2:06] Speaker 2: to talk about some of my favorite topics electrification and transport,
[2:10] Speaker 2: climate change, and really the state of our policy and politics.
[2:15] Speaker 2: So Senator Wiener, maybe the start One of my favorite
[2:19] Speaker 2: kind of wonky reports came out yesterday, the California New
[2:21] Speaker 2: Car Dealers Report kind of showing the state of the
[2:24] Speaker 2: California EV market. And what the report found was one
[2:27] Speaker 2: in four car sales were electric for twenty twenty three,
[2:30] Speaker 2: just about so at a high level, where do you
[2:34] Speaker 2: think the state of California is when it comes to
[2:37] Speaker 2: the EV transition?
[2:39] Speaker 3: Well, first of all, thank you for having me. California
[2:43] Speaker 3: is absolutely leaving the nation in terms of transition to
[2:47] Speaker 3: zero emission vehicles, both cars and trucks. We are, as
[2:53] Speaker 3: you mentioned, the quarter of new car sales are zero emission.
[2:58] Speaker 3: It's been accelerating. We are actually ahead of goals that
[3:03] Speaker 3: were set a decade or so ago in terms of
[3:05] Speaker 3: number of cars and trucks being sold, the percentage so forth,
[3:11] Speaker 3: were several years ahead. That doesn't mean that we should
[3:14] Speaker 3: rest inner, Laurels. We should accelerate that transition and move
[3:18] Speaker 3: away from fossil fuels.
[3:20] Speaker 2: And in terms of your role as a state senator,
[3:22] Speaker 2: you know we had officials yesterday from the CEC. We
[3:25] Speaker 2: had a chair when we Randolph from carb How does
[3:29] Speaker 2: the state legislature play a role in this kind of
[3:31] Speaker 2: transition compared to you know, writing rules. California is pretty
[3:34] Speaker 2: much a powerhouse, so you've got a lot of policymakers
[3:37] Speaker 2: working on this topic.
[3:38] Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean fundamentally, the legislature, we appropriate the funds,
[3:43] Speaker 3: and so for example, a couple of years ago, when
[3:45] Speaker 3: we had a mega budget surplus, it turns out it
[3:48] Speaker 3: was not as big as we thought it was. We
[3:51] Speaker 3: invested fifty billion dollars in one year to the clean
[3:56] Speaker 3: energy transition, which is just extraordinary, right, and even with
[4:01] Speaker 3: a bad budget situation, now that's only minimally being impacted.
[4:06] Speaker 3: But we also are working towards regulatory reform California like
[4:12] Speaker 3: some other states, but we do it particularly well well
[4:15] Speaker 3: or really poorly, because it's bad. Sometimes we enact so
[4:21] Speaker 3: much red tape and so much review and process that
[4:25] Speaker 3: even when we have the money, it takes us too
[4:28] Speaker 3: long to deployee, whether it's new housing, new public transportation,
[4:31] Speaker 3: new clean energy, new transmission infrastructure. And so we have
[4:35] Speaker 3: been trying to streamline whether it's charging stations or other
[4:41] Speaker 3: clean energy forms of energy, clean energy transition, great and charging.
[4:45] Speaker 2: I think because we heard just through that here is
[4:47] Speaker 2: a real major issues for anything you can do to
[4:49] Speaker 2: kind of streamline that process will be helpful. And you
[4:52] Speaker 2: mentioned the kind of big goals that California has had
[4:55] Speaker 2: and met for the electric vehicle transition moving forward, you know,
[4:59] Speaker 2: you have the advanta clean Cars two policy with the
[5:01] Speaker 2: one hundred percent target by twenty thirty five. I'm from
[5:04] Speaker 2: the East coast, from New Jersey. They've signed on to
[5:07] Speaker 2: clean Cars two in the Tri State. It's not uniform.
[5:09] Speaker 2: Connecticut's been having a hard time with, you know, choosing
[5:13] Speaker 2: to follow that policy. For those who say that one
[5:16] Speaker 2: hundred percent you know ev or zero mission share of
[5:19] Speaker 2: sale by twenty thirty five is too much, you know,
[5:22] Speaker 2: what's your perspective on that is? Are things moving? You know,
[5:25] Speaker 2: maybe faster than you expected? Is twenty thirty five the
[5:28] Speaker 2: right target? Should it be sooner? Should it be later?
[5:32] Speaker 2: I think it should be as quickly as humanly possible.
[5:34] Speaker 2: I think yes we can do that.
[5:36] Speaker 3: It's obviously it's hard, but you know, with with the
[5:41] Speaker 3: right incentives and the right public policy and with the will,
[5:46] Speaker 3: we can get it done. And we've just got to
[5:49] Speaker 3: get off the fossil fuels. It's it's just so unsustainable
[5:54] Speaker 3: and it's maddening that we continue to have these fights.
[5:57] Speaker 3: But yes, we absolutely can do it if we want
[5:59] Speaker 3: to do it.
[6:00] Speaker 2: And so I gave you in a sense, the argument
[6:02] Speaker 2: for maybe the right of things are moving too fast
[6:05] Speaker 2: and these policies are kind of forcing people in the direction.
[6:09] Speaker 2: If you spend a lot of time on Twitter, which
[6:11] Speaker 2: I maybe do too much of, you get maybe the
[6:13] Speaker 2: kind of progressive left the argument around, well, what about
[6:16] Speaker 2: public transit. We're spending so much time talking about cars
[6:18] Speaker 2: and talking about, you know, moving people from gas to
[6:22] Speaker 2: private EV. Do you think California has done, you know,
[6:27] Speaker 2: light enough on public transit? Is there more they do
[6:30] Speaker 2: or do you think the EV focus is where policymakers
[6:32] Speaker 2: heads should be at currently we have.
[6:34] Speaker 3: Not California has not done it nearly enough on public transportation.
[6:40] Speaker 3: We are falling behind, We're losing grounds. And I support
[6:44] Speaker 3: the transitions to zero emission vehicles, but we also need
[6:48] Speaker 3: to be very clear that a car is a car,
[6:50] Speaker 3: and yes, you can have a car that strangles the
[6:53] Speaker 3: planet by burning oil, but then then have a car
[6:57] Speaker 3: that doesn't. But both of those are incredibly resource intensive
[7:03] Speaker 3: to build, require massive road infrastructure with huge costs. They
[7:14] Speaker 3: destroy cities in some ways, not destroyers overstating it. They
[7:18] Speaker 3: really distort cities or some amazing cities in the US
[7:23] Speaker 3: that then got rebuilt around the needs of cars in
[7:26] Speaker 3: terms of roads and massive amounts of parking. It takes
[7:29] Speaker 3: up so much space, it creates all sorts of risk
[7:32] Speaker 3: and danger to people on our roads. And that's true
[7:37] Speaker 3: whether it's a zero emission or a fossil fuel burning car.
[7:42] Speaker 3: And so we need to move away from this extreme
[7:45] Speaker 3: car dependence have world class transit, and that means having
[7:49] Speaker 3: a true statewide rail system. It should not take twice
[7:53] Speaker 3: as long to take the train from the Bay Area
[7:56] Speaker 3: to la as it does to drive, which is true
[7:58] Speaker 3: right now, that's horror, and so we need high speed
[8:01] Speaker 3: rail and we need to get over our addiction to cars.
[8:07] Speaker 3: And I will also add one bad trajectory and the
[8:11] Speaker 3: zero emission transition, is that, as with fossil fuel cars,
[8:17] Speaker 3: zero mission cars are getting bigger and have bigger and
[8:19] Speaker 3: bigger and all these mega SUVs, zero mission vehicles which
[8:23] Speaker 3: consume more energy, which are very dangerous for anyone other
[8:26] Speaker 3: than the person inside, which take up too much space,
[8:30] Speaker 3: and we need to absolutely move away from these mega, huge,
[8:35] Speaker 3: zero mission vehicles. And that could mean a law restricting
[8:39] Speaker 3: the size of vehicles, which I know people want to
[8:41] Speaker 3: have the freedom to drive a tank down the street
[8:44] Speaker 3: but that's not in society's best interest.
[8:46] Speaker 2: But on the point around safety, I think there's an
[8:50] Speaker 2: element of that that is true that basically with electric
[8:52] Speaker 2: vehicles you do have a battery in it. At every level,
[8:55] Speaker 2: there's a little bit of weight added right to kind
[8:57] Speaker 2: of compensate obviously other kind of benefit of going electric
[9:00] Speaker 2: in terms of the parts you're getting out in a
[9:02] Speaker 2: potential maintenance. On safety, you introduced a bill speaking of
[9:05] Speaker 2: i'd say controversial topics last week around capping the miles
[9:09] Speaker 2: per hour by about ten or encouraging I guess auto
[9:13] Speaker 2: makers to do so. Can you explain this bill a
[9:15] Speaker 2: little bit. I know I made a lot of news, it.
[9:17] Speaker 3: Did a lot of opinions. So the bill will require
[9:23] Speaker 3: new cars manufactured or sold in California by twenty twenty
[9:28] Speaker 3: seven to come with a speed limitter or a speed
[9:33] Speaker 3: governor that would cap speeds at ten miles over the
[9:38] Speaker 3: speed limit. It would still remain illegal to go one
[9:41] Speaker 3: mile over the speed limit, but physically you would be
[9:44] Speaker 3: unable to go more than ten miles over the speed
[9:46] Speaker 3: limit with an emergency override for extreme situations. Over four
[9:53] Speaker 3: thousand Californians are dying every year on our roads. That
[9:57] Speaker 3: is a twenty percent increase over the last five years.
[10:00] Speaker 3: It's also going up nationally. Even though we become very
[10:03] Speaker 3: numb to traffic fatality character fatalities, drivers, pedestrian, cyclists. We
[10:10] Speaker 3: sometimes it's tempting to view it as just a normal
[10:13] Speaker 3: part of life. It is not normal. It does not
[10:16] Speaker 3: have to be that way. Other wealthy nations do not
[10:18] Speaker 3: have that problem. And there are various reasons why we
[10:23] Speaker 3: have that problem, and one of them is that we
[10:24] Speaker 3: drive so damn fast. And so this is an existing technology.
[10:30] Speaker 3: There are already cars being manufactured with this technology. The
[10:34] Speaker 3: EU is moving towards a form of this. Some cities
[10:37] Speaker 3: are transitioning to their municipal fleets to have these speed limitters,
[10:42] Speaker 3: and California should lead on this. And it has been
[10:45] Speaker 3: a political warshock test in terms of the reaction, people
[10:49] Speaker 3: having very reactions.
[10:52] Speaker 2: A lot of support coming out in favor of it,
[10:54] Speaker 2: or has it been mostly people who are concerned about
[10:56] Speaker 2: you know, overreach.
[10:58] Speaker 3: Well, opposition and anger always motivate people to speak up more.
[11:03] Speaker 3: You just have to look at Twitter for that. But
[11:07] Speaker 3: there's a lot of support and a lot of opposition
[11:10] Speaker 3: for sure there And I've literally had spouses who I
[11:14] Speaker 3: know who will text me separately, one of them saying
[11:17] Speaker 3: this is a horrible idea, and one of them saying
[11:19] Speaker 3: this is an awesome idea. And that is very reflective
[11:22] Speaker 3: of I think where a lot of people are. You know,
[11:24] Speaker 3: I think fundamentally, you know, people have this notion I have.
[11:28] Speaker 3: Don't tell me what to do. I have a freedom
[11:30] Speaker 3: to drive however fast fast, however fast I want. And
[11:34] Speaker 3: if I want to risk a ticket, that's on me
[11:35] Speaker 3: to risk that. And I'm all for personal freedom, but
[11:39] Speaker 3: personal freedom ends when you are risking killing or maiming
[11:44] Speaker 3: other people. And when people are driving at ninety one
[11:49] Speaker 3: hundred miles an hour or sixty miles an hour through
[11:52] Speaker 3: a residential neighborhood, that is creating huge risk for other people,
[11:57] Speaker 3: and you do not have a right to engage in
[11:59] Speaker 3: behavior could make someone a quadriplegic or kill them.
[12:03] Speaker 2: Well, shifting gears a little bit away from cars to
[12:06] Speaker 2: another I think piece of legislation that has been called
[12:09] Speaker 2: both controversial but also a landmark climate disclosure by The
[12:13] Speaker 2: New York Times. You were the author of a greenhouse
[12:16] Speaker 2: guest emission disclosure bill. A lot of folks here in
[12:19] Speaker 2: the room. Some may be familiar with it, some may
[12:21] Speaker 2: not be. So can you talk at a high level
[12:23] Speaker 2: what your bill would do, and then I'll ask you
[12:25] Speaker 2: a little bit about its companion bill.
[12:27] Speaker 3: Sure. So last year it took three years, sent a
[12:31] Speaker 3: bill two fifty three paths and the governor signed it.
[12:34] Speaker 3: And it is a law that requires large corporations with
[12:41] Speaker 3: a gross annual revenue of a billion dollars or more
[12:44] Speaker 3: who do business in California, requires them to disclose their
[12:49] Speaker 3: entire carbon footprint, including scope one, which is cooperation, Scope two,
[12:54] Speaker 3: which is energy usage and a few other things, and
[12:57] Speaker 3: Scope three, which includes, among other things, supply chain. This
[13:03] Speaker 3: is an existing methodology. We didn't create a new methodology,
[13:08] Speaker 3: the GHG protocols. There are major corporate some of the
[13:11] Speaker 3: largest companies in the world are already doing this, and
[13:15] Speaker 3: we think that they all should be doing this so
[13:18] Speaker 3: that we have that data, so the public investors don't
[13:22] Speaker 3: have to rely on representations and can actually look at
[13:26] Speaker 3: the data themselves. So this is really a world leading
[13:31] Speaker 3: effort here in California, and I'm so grateful to my
[13:34] Speaker 3: colleagues and to the governor for helping us enact it
[13:37] Speaker 3: into law.
[13:37] Speaker 2: So when would this policy go into into play As
[13:39] Speaker 2: a twenty twenty.
[13:40] Speaker 3: Six it's basically a five year ramp up. The California
[13:46] Speaker 3: Resources Board now needs to be coming up with the
[13:50] Speaker 3: implementing regulations. Disclosures will start in twenty twenty six, and
[13:55] Speaker 3: then Scope three, which is for many companies of over
[13:59] Speaker 3: ninety percent the carbon emissions, that starts in twenty seven,
[14:04] Speaker 3: and then the full everything is implemented by twenty thirty.
[14:09] Speaker 3: So we have a gradual ramp up, understanding that for
[14:11] Speaker 3: some companies it's a transition, but we're really excited about this.
[14:15] Speaker 3: And about fifty five it applies to both publicly traded
[14:19] Speaker 3: and privately held interesting companies, so we can include corporations
[14:24] Speaker 3: that the SEC may not be able to include. And
[14:27] Speaker 3: so it's about fifty five hundred large corporations and it's
[14:31] Speaker 3: going to be fantastic.
[14:33] Speaker 2: And at the same time you have this GHG bill,
[14:36] Speaker 2: you have a climate risk bill that you were a
[14:38] Speaker 2: sponsor on or a lead sponsor. How does that bill
[14:41] Speaker 2: work differently or is it pretty similar in terms of
[14:43] Speaker 2: a structure.
[14:43] Speaker 3: Yeah, so that's Center Bill two sixty one. The lead
[14:46] Speaker 3: author was my colleague from Los Angeles Senator Henry Stern,
[14:49] Speaker 3: and we have the two of us partnered really on
[14:51] Speaker 3: both bills. And that bill will require corporations doing business
[14:57] Speaker 3: in California with gross annual revenue five hundred million or
[15:01] Speaker 3: more to disclose their their climate risk, which is important,
[15:06] Speaker 3: you know, for the markets and for all sorts of reasons.
[15:11] Speaker 2: So for both these bills, I know have been busy
[15:13] Speaker 2: at the be NF some of the last there so
[15:15] Speaker 2: I haven't read the latest news, but last week I
[15:18] Speaker 2: was reading that some funds have been frozen in terms
[15:20] Speaker 2: of implementation. What's the latest status on that kind of
[15:22] Speaker 2: budget battle. I know you've been up in Sacramento working
[15:25] Speaker 2: on year end budget.
[15:27] Speaker 3: Yeah. The governor and I'm a supporter of the governor,
[15:30] Speaker 3: he's a friend. The governor did this thing. It's it's
[15:34] Speaker 3: like these there are certain governor tricks that governors do
[15:39] Speaker 3: during deficity years. Arnold Schwartzener or the two apparently, which
[15:44] Speaker 3: is he basically he proposed a but we have a
[15:47] Speaker 3: big budget deficit, so he proposed his first draft of
[15:50] Speaker 3: a budget earlier this month, which basically for I don't
[15:55] Speaker 3: know if it's all or just a lot of the
[15:57] Speaker 3: laws that we passed and were signed into law last
[16:00] Speaker 3: year basically proposed like zeroing out the funding to implement
[16:06] Speaker 3: those laws. So it wasn't only these two bills, it
[16:09] Speaker 3: was a lot of builds. I understand that this is
[16:12] Speaker 3: like a trick that governors used because the goal is
[16:16] Speaker 3: to then force the legislature as budget negotiations happened to
[16:19] Speaker 3: force us to negotiate to fund the bills that we
[16:23] Speaker 3: authored and that the governor signed. My view is that
[16:26] Speaker 3: it is not subject to negotiation. A law is either
[16:29] Speaker 3: a law or it's not a law. We already went
[16:31] Speaker 3: through an intense screening process last year, including for cost
[16:34] Speaker 3: on a huge number of bills. And if a law
[16:37] Speaker 3: has been passed and signed into law, into the law
[16:41] Speaker 3: into law, it is the law of the lands. And
[16:44] Speaker 3: we either have rule of law in California or we don't.
[16:48] Speaker 3: And we should never be setting a precedent and governors
[16:51] Speaker 3: should never be setting a precedent that if a law
[16:53] Speaker 3: has been enacted it may not actually be a real law,
[16:57] Speaker 3: because then we have to go through the process again.
[16:59] Speaker 3: That that would be a terrible black eye for California
[17:03] Speaker 3: in terms of our adherence to the rule of law.
[17:06] Speaker 2: And I think that actually launches us into a bit
[17:08] Speaker 2: of the last topic I wanted to talk about about
[17:10] Speaker 2: California's role as a leader in the US. Growing up
[17:13] Speaker 2: in New Jersey, they're always used to hear the phrase,
[17:15] Speaker 2: so goes California, so goes the nation. But you know,
[17:20] Speaker 2: policy freezes changes in things like even outside the scope
[17:24] Speaker 2: of transport solar incentives. Is California still a leader in
[17:30] Speaker 2: the same way there have been suggestions by interest groups
[17:32] Speaker 2: in California that maybe California shouldn't be leading on climate
[17:36] Speaker 2: policy anymore in the way that it has. So from
[17:38] Speaker 2: your perspective, with all of these policies in flux, you know,
[17:42] Speaker 2: is California currently remaining a leader and what is California
[17:45] Speaker 2: need to do to kind of maintain its leadership.
[17:47] Speaker 3: The answer is generally yes, And yes, we're always going
[17:51] Speaker 3: to have the climate deniers and the climate delayers who
[17:54] Speaker 3: don't want California to lead. California continues to lead the
[18:00] Speaker 3: massive investment we've been making in clean energy, what we
[18:03] Speaker 3: talked about earlier with zero emission vehicles, some of the
[18:08] Speaker 3: work that's happening around building decarbonization, so we are continuing
[18:14] Speaker 3: to lead, or the carbon disclosures. Yeah, and I'm very
[18:17] Speaker 3: proud of that we are falling short in some areas.
[18:21] Speaker 3: So California for decades led on distributed energy resources rooftop
[18:28] Speaker 3: and similar forms of solar and energy storage, and the
[18:33] Speaker 3: California Public Utilities Commission, which seems focused like a laser
[18:38] Speaker 3: on destroying rooftop solar in California, which is rooftop solar
[18:43] Speaker 3: is essential for our clean energy transition. Yes, we need
[18:47] Speaker 3: utility scale solar, absolutely, but we also need distributed, decentralized solar.
[18:55] Speaker 3: And the California Public Utilities Commission, which it might view,
[18:57] Speaker 3: should lose jurisdiction over solar it's proved and that it's
[19:00] Speaker 3: not capable of effectively overseeing it, should move over to
[19:04] Speaker 3: the Energy Commission or some other agency. Uh. Basically totally
[19:12] Speaker 3: slashed the subsidies and the supports and the incentives for
[19:18] Speaker 3: people to install rooftop solar to the point where the
[19:21] Speaker 3: solar industry in California is unraveling. And you know, and
[19:26] Speaker 3: the governor the original version was even worse, and the
[19:30] Speaker 3: governor directed or that he can't direct, but requested that
[19:34] Speaker 3: the CPUC go back to the drawing board. They did,
[19:37] Speaker 3: and then they came back with a less terrible plan,
[19:40] Speaker 3: but it's still terrible, and I really hope that the
[19:43] Speaker 3: governor sends them back to the drawing board again. I
[19:46] Speaker 3: think there will be a legislation this year to try
[19:49] Speaker 3: to deal with it, But the pg and ees of
[19:52] Speaker 3: the world are still quite powerful in the legislature. They
[19:56] Speaker 3: should not be, but they are. And this is a
[19:59] Speaker 3: real tech for California. And the other area where we
[20:02] Speaker 3: are real risk is around public transportation and rail. Were
[20:07] Speaker 3: trying to do more to shore up transit and expand
[20:10] Speaker 3: it and high speed rail. It's maddening to me. As
[20:14] Speaker 3: I mentioned before, we don't have true statewide rail system
[20:17] Speaker 3: in California, and there's been this the right wing pr
[20:20] Speaker 3: machine that characterizes high speed rail as the trains nowhere
[20:25] Speaker 3: San Francisco, La Fresno or not nowhere, and they have
[20:30] Speaker 3: delayed and obstructed and obstructed, which has caused the costs
[20:34] Speaker 3: to escalate, and then they blame High Speed Rail Authority
[20:38] Speaker 3: for the escalated costs that they helped the cause by
[20:41] Speaker 3: obstructing and delaying the project. So we have to get
[20:44] Speaker 3: that done.
[20:45] Speaker 2: Yeah, So across the board, I think there's real challenges.
[20:48] Speaker 2: But as you've noted, California continues to leave in terms
[20:51] Speaker 2: of zero mission and some of its policies that are
[20:54] Speaker 2: yet to be in place. The reason why I asked
[20:56] Speaker 2: that we've been talking a lot at the conference and
[20:57] Speaker 2: maybe to close about twenty twenty four as an election year.
[21:01] Speaker 2: And you know, there's two very different candidates running in
[21:04] Speaker 2: Donald Trump and President Biden. You know, assuming that if
[21:08] Speaker 2: Donald Trump were to win, how do you think California
[21:10] Speaker 2: should respond in such a situation given its you know,
[21:13] Speaker 2: previous leadership, but also some of the challenges that you mentioned.
[21:16] Speaker 3: Yeah, and it's you know, speaking of maddening and frustrating.
[21:21] Speaker 3: You know, Joe Biden is one of the most successful
[21:25] Speaker 3: presidents in modern US history, but he the public, for
[21:29] Speaker 3: whatever reason, doesn't want to give him credit for any
[21:32] Speaker 3: of the good things he's done. I mean, numbers just
[21:35] Speaker 3: came out today Axio's head of things, sorry to quote
[21:37] Speaker 3: another application comparing just put a nice chart comparing GDP
[21:42] Speaker 3: growth in the US to other wealthy nations. We are
[21:46] Speaker 3: like hugely ahead of the EU of Japan, et cetera.
[21:51] Speaker 3: And part of that is because of the massive investments
[21:53] Speaker 3: that we've been making under Biden the President's leadership. But
[21:56] Speaker 3: he doesn't get the credit if if Trump comes back,
[22:00] Speaker 3: I mean, we had to deal with that for four
[22:02] Speaker 3: years in California and we fought him and we will
[22:05] Speaker 3: fight him again. We just you know, it will absolutely
[22:10] Speaker 3: hinder our ability to advance in terms of some of
[22:14] Speaker 3: these financial investments that have been so impactful in terms
[22:18] Speaker 3: of what might happen for on immigration, and immigration makes
[22:22] Speaker 3: us stronger in many ways, including shoring up our workforce.
[22:27] Speaker 3: And God forbid, he wins and they and the Republicans
[22:32] Speaker 3: take both Houses of Congress. They will kill the filibuster immediately.
[22:35] Speaker 3: They'll do what some of our members didn't have the
[22:37] Speaker 3: fortitude to do, and and that will be horrific. And
[22:42] Speaker 3: but we will fight as we always do.
[22:44] Speaker 2: Right well, Senator, we don't really appreciate your time this morning.
[22:47] Speaker 2: We could talk about climate for another hour probably, but
[22:49] Speaker 2: I appreciate you joining us at the summer today.
[22:51] Speaker 3: Thank you.
[23:02] Speaker 1: Switched On is produced by Cam Gray with production assistance
[23:05] Speaker 1: from Kamala Shelling and Ulushi Kurunorate. Bloomberg NEF is a
[23:09] Speaker 1: service provided by Bloomberg Finance LP and its affiliates. This
[23:12] Speaker 1: recording does not constitute, nor should it be construed as
[23:15] Speaker 1: investment in vice investment recommendations, or a recommendation as to
[23:19] Speaker 1: an investment or other strategy. Bloomberg NEIF should not be
[23:22] Speaker 1: considered as information sufficient upon which to base an investment decision.
[23:26] Speaker 1: Neither Bloomberg Finance LP nor any of its affiliates makes
[23:29] Speaker 1: any representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness
[23:32] Speaker 1: of the information contained in this recording, and any liability
[23:35] Speaker 1: as a result of this recording is expressly disclaimed

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.