News

(SACRAMENTO, Calif.) — California has voted not to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom, according to a projection from ABC News based on exit polls and an analysis of votes.

With 65% of the expected vote reported so far, 66% of electors in Tuesday’s special election are against recalling the Democratic governor.

“I’m humbled and grateful to the millions and millions of Californians that exercise their fundamental right to vote, and express themselves so overwhelmingly by rejecting the division by rejecting the cynicism,” Newsom said late Tuesday night in his victory speech. “By rejecting, so much of the negativity that’s defined our politics in this country over the course of so many years.”

Californians were faced with a two-part question — if they would like to recall Newsom and who they would like to replace him with if he was recalled. Newsom needed more than 50% of voters to vote against recalling him to keep his job as the top executive of the most populous state.

Forty-six candidates were competing to replace him, and while the question is moot, nationally syndicated conservative radio host Larry Elder — the frontrunner going into the election — leads that pack with 44% of the vote currently.

In post-election remarks, Elder conceded the recall was unsuccessful.

“Let’s be gracious in defeat,” Elder said, after he was met with boos when he referenced Newsom by name. “We may have lost the battle, but we are going to win the war.”

This is the fourth time in the nation’s history that voters have had an election to recall their governor, and only one governor has been recalled in the last century. In 2003, Democratic California Gov. Gray Davis, facing extremely low approval ratings, was recalled and replaced with former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

This time, Republicans have a crowded primary field and, before nationally syndicated conservative radio host Larry Elder’s entrance into the race, the field was without a clear leader.

Former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer was once thought to be the front-runner and is seen as the moderate in the race. Businessman John Cox, who was the GOP’s gubernatorial nominee in 2018, campaigned across the state with a live bear and an 8-foot ball of trash.

Reality star and Olympic gold medalist Caitlyn Jenner entered the recall field, although she spent some time out of the country in Australia, reportedly filming a celebrity edition of a reality show.

Going into the election, numbers appeared to be in the incumbent’s favor, but Newsom still recruited some of the biggest Democratic heavy-hitters to stump for him, including Vice President Kamala Harris and Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. President Joe Biden hit the trail with Newsom to close out his campaign in Long Beach, California, on Monday night.

“This is not hyperbole. The eyes of the nation are on California because the decision you’re about to make isn’t just going to have a huge impact on California, it’s going to reverberate around the nation, and quite frankly not a joke around the world,” Biden said Monday.

According to preliminary exit polls, 55% of voters participating in this election approved of how Newsom is handling his job as governor. In 2003, exit polls showed Davis’ approval rating at 26% — a stark difference from how the voters perceive the current governor.

Historically, gubernatorial recalls produce similar vote margins for the governor holding office as they had in their last election, according to recall expert and senior fellow at Wagner College, Joshua Spivak. Gray Davis got 47% of the vote in 2002, and 44% in 2003 when he was recalled. In Wisconsin in 2010, Scott Walker was elected with 52.2% of the vote, and defeated his recall with 53.1%.

In 2018, Newsom won the state with 61.9% of the vote to GOP nominee John Cox’s 38.1%. In 2020, Biden carried with a similar margin, 63.5% of the vote to Trump’s 34.3%.

Democratic voter registration in the Golden State largely outpaces that of both Republicans and independents, putting Newsom at an advantage. So far, Democrats are leading both groups combined when it comes to returning their ballots: Democrats have returned nearly 4.1 million compared to the 3.8 million Republican and independent ballots that have been returned, according Monday data from Political Data Inc.

Democrats have attempted to nationalize the race to increase enthusiasm, warning of lawmaking similar to that of Republican-led states.

Harris, a native of the Bay Area, rallied with Newsom on Thursday and warned of the national consequences the recall could have if it was successful, referencing the recent change in abortion laws in Texas, among other things.

“What’s happening in Texas, what’s happening in Georgia, what’s happening around our country with these policies that are about attacking women’s rights, reproductive rights, voting rights, workers rights, they think if they can win in California they can do this anywhere, but we’re gonna show them they can’t,” Harris said.

In preliminary exit polls, a plurality (31%) of voters said the pandemic was the most important issue facing the Golden State, and Newsom spent the campaign warning voters about potential policy changes surrounding the coronavirus if the recall passed. His team released an ad painting the election as “life or death,” and the governor singled out Elder’s promises that he would immediately end mask mandates and testing for state employees.

Preliminary exit polls also showed support for Newsom’s coronavirus policies. Only about 3 in 10 voters feel that mitigation measures put in place by the governor are too strict, and 7 in 10 support the state requiring students wear masks in schools Additionally, the vast majority of voters feel the pandemic is either getting better (39%) or staying the same (31%), rather than getting worse (24%).

Ahead of the election, Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, were already baselessly raising the alarm about the potential for voter fraud, based on conspiracies about the 2020 election. Trump claimed that the election was “totally rigged,” even though the state has been reliably Democratic for decades, voting against Republican presidential candidates in every election since 1992.

Elder warned of “shenanigans” last week — though he told ABC News Saturday, “So many people are going to vote to have it recalled, I’m not worried about fraud.”

Elder previously said he believed Biden won the 2020 election “fairly and squarely.” But he was encouraging his supporters to call a hotline to report issues of voter fraud for litigation purposes in the recall, saying he fears there will be integrity issues similar to those of the 2020 election — despite there being no widespread evidence of voter fraud in November.

Even before results were released, Elder had a link on his website — which has seemingly since been removed — asking visitors to sign a petition “demanding a special session of the California legislature to investigate and ameliorate the twisted results of this 2021 Recall Election of Governor Gavin Newsom.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(LOS ANGELES) — As Californians head to the polls to decide on whether they want to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom, and if so, who to replace him with, preliminary data is showing positives for the incumbent.

Just 3 in 10 California voters say Newsom’s pandemic control measures are too strict, countering a key argument in the recall drive against him. And 6 in 10 in preliminary exit poll results rate the Republican Party unfavorably — a challenge for those seeking to unseat the incumbent Democrat.

Still, other preliminary results in the recall election exit poll are less incumbent-friendly: Six in 10 voters call the cost of living in their area “unmanageable,” and the electorate divides evenly in rating the state’s economy positively or negatively, 49-48%.

Helpfully for Newsom — if it holds in later data — 54% of voters in preliminary results say he’s in touch with their concerns. More, 69%, support the state’s student mask mandate. And 63% side with Newsom in seeing vaccination as more of a public health responsibility than a personal choice.

More call the pandemic the state’s top issue than pick any of four other issues offered in the exit poll. Notably, just 24% say the pandemic is getting worse in the state; a plurality of voters, 39%, say it’s improving, with the rest saying it’s staying the same.

While economic discontent can be challenging for incumbents, it’s far from a replay of the recall of Gov. Gray Davis in 2003. Then, a vast 83% rated the state’s economy negatively; accordingly, 71% disapproved of Davis’ performance as governor, clearing the way for Arnold Schwarzenegger to take his seat.

A further difference — to the extent it holds in subsequent data — may be most crucial of all: Democrats outnumber Republicans in these preliminary results by 17 percentage points, 43-26% (with the rest independents and others.) That looks more like the electorate in Newsom’s 2018 election as governor, 46-23%, Democrat-Republican, and less like 2003, a virtually even 39-38%.

In another measure of partisan preferences, more voters see the Democratic Party favorably rather than unfavorably, by 52-43%. While an underwhelming expression of support in itself, that compares with a broadly negative view of the Republican Party, 32-63%, favorable-unfavorable.

In part reflecting those views of the parties, 55% of voters in these preliminary data say they’d be “concerned” or “scared” if Newsom were removed, dividing about evenly between those two options. Fewer, 40%, would be “excited” or “optimistic.”

Approvals

The exit poll asks Newsom’s job approval rating, a result that’s embargoed for release until after the polls close tonight at 8 p.m. Pacific time. In available data, a recent pre-election poll by the Public Policy Institute of California found that 53% of likely voters approved of his work in office. While only mildly positive, that’s a far cry from Davis’ approval in the 2003 recall, a dismal 27%.

For his part, President Joe Biden — who campaigned with Newsom on Monday — has a 56% approval rating in these preliminary results. Biden won the state in 2020 with 63% support, versus 34% for former President Donald Trump. In results so far, 55% say they voted for Biden a year ago, and 32% for Trump.

By contrast, 34% express a favorable opinion of Newsom’s leading challenger, Republican Larry Elder, while 49% see him unfavorably. That makes Elder less of a draw than Schwarzenegger 18 years ago; he had a 50-45% favorable-unfavorable rating.

The California recall election exit poll is being conducted with a mix of telephone interviews with early and absentee voters and in-person interviews with Election Day voters at a sample of polling places today. Results so far, as noted, are preliminary, and can change as additional data come in throughout the night.

COVID-19 pandemic

While pandemic-related attitudes may boost Newsom, so does Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. California is third-lowest nationally in per-capita weekly COVID-19 cases, tied for the second-lowest death rate and one of only three states plus the District of Columbia to have less than a high level of community transmission. Eighty-four percent of adults in the state have received at least one dose of a vaccine, ranking it in the top-10 states nationally.

That said, the pandemic is hardly the only issue facing California. Preliminarily, 31% cite it as the most important issue among five offered, compared with homelessness, 22%; the economy, 16%; wildfires, 14%; and crime, 8%.

On an additional issue not included in the top-issue list, 60% call climate change a very serious problem for the state and 19% call it somewhat serious. Just 17% don’t think it’s serious.

Voting

Eighty percent of voters in these preliminary results cast their ballot in advance of Election Day, mostly by mail rather than at a drop-off location. Majorities in the preliminary exit poll results report voting by mail across partisan lines — 85% of Democrats, 72% of independents and 62% of Republicans.

If follows that late campaigning can’t have made much of a difference: Eighty-seven percent of voters say they made their choice more than two weeks ago; indeed, 7 in 10 say they decided before August.

Latinos

Notably among groups, Hispanic/Latino voters make up a quarter of the turnout in these early results. That compares with 31% in the 2020 presidential election, but surpasses this group’s share of the electorate in previous midterms in data since 1994 and in the 2003 recall contest alike.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Senate Democrats on Tuesday introduced their latest version of a sweeping election reform bill to counter the record-number of voting restrictions that have passed in GOP-led states, which they say make it harder for minorities and low-income Americans to cast a ballot.

The modified bill, now known as The Freedom to Vote Act, is a compromise after the previous For The People Act failed to pass in the Senate last June.

Significantly, the new bill was crafted by a group that included moderate Sen. Joe Manchin, a key swing vote, after he opposed an earlier version of the legislation charging that it was too broad and lacked bipartisan support.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., promised a vote on the bill next week, most likely a procedural vote to break an expected GOP filibuster.

“This is a good proposal. One that nobody in this chamber should oppose,” Schumer said on the Senate floor Tuesday morning. “My colleague Senator Manchin is working with Republicans to secure support for the bill and we look forward to hearing what changes they might make on legislation.”

Changes in the newly negotiated election reform bill.

The new bill still encompasses sweeping election law changes, from voter ID requirements, expanded early voting, making Election Day a national holiday, banning partisan gerrymandering, and implementing election security and campaign finance measures.

But among the provisions dropped or changed is the automatic mailing of ballots. Under the new measure, any voter may request a mail-in ballot but they are not sent out automatically. The legislation will continue to allow voter roll purges but requires changes to be “done on the basis of reliable and objective evidence and prohibits the use of returned mail sent by third parties to remove voters.”

The bill would also no longer implement public financing of presidential and congressional elections. Still, there are a number of election security provisions, including mandatory, nationwide use of machines that deliver paper ballots.

In an attempt to address Republican states that passed changes giving partisan officials a say in election outcomes following President Donald Trump’s false allegation that the 2020 presidential election was “stolen,” Senate Democrats have proposed in the bill establishing “federal protections to insulate nonpartisan state and local officials who administer federal elections from undue partisan interference or control.”

“The fact of the matter is that this legislation is critical for stopping some of the most egregious assaults against voting rights happening at the state level. A few weeks ago, the governor of Texas signed one of the most sweeping voter suppression bills in the entire country,” Schumer said.

Voting rights advocates have praised the bill and are urging the Senate to pass the legislation.

“The Freedom to Vote Act is a very strong bill. It gives powerful new momentum to the fight to protect democracy. It should be passed, and soon,” said Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law.

“There is now no substitute for action. As redistricting unfolds across the country, time is of the essence. Lawmakers from both parties should embrace this new legislation, and will do so if they are serious about protecting democracy,” he added.

It is unclear if this bill would garner the support of many Republicans, though Manchin has been talking to fellow moderate Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska. The Minority blocked the Democrats’ first stab at the bill claiming it was a solution in search of a problem and maintaining that election administration is the province of states — not the federal government.

Yet, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, signaled that there are provisions in the latest bill that she could support.

“He sent me a very high-level summary last week which they read, but it does not have many of the details fleshed out. There are two provisions in that if they’re done correctly I would support. One is the disclosure of contributors to dark money groups, but it has to apply to all of them,” Collins said.

Ten Republicans would be needed to overcome the chamber’s filibuster rule requiring 60 votes for most legislation. To modify that rule, all 50 Democrats would need to be on board with changing Senate rules to allow the legislation to pass on a simple majority vote — with Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie — but Manchin has point blank refused to support such an extraordinary move.

“The filibuster is permanent,” Manchin told ABC News when pressed on a voting rights specific carve-out.

At this point, it appears there is not likely to be enough GOP support to pass the measure, though Manchin said he’s continuing conversations with Murkowski and that the Senate has “made some good strides” finding compromise.

“We made some major changes from the original position we’re taking and we’ve got something that makes a lot of sense,” Manchin told ABC News’ Congressional Correspondent Rachel Scott on Tuesday.

“I’m anxious to go talk to all my Republican friends, which I’ve been doing, giving the outline of what we’re trying to change and see if there’s a filibuster,” he added.

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., responded Monday night to backlash sparked by her controversial Met Gala gown emblazoned with the words “Tax the Rich,” saying she intended to carry the message into a wealthy space and borrowed the dress because “while the Met is known for its spectacle, we should have a conversation about it.”

The New York congresswoman dominated talk about the gala on social media, with people calling her a hypocrite for wearing her economic justice message on the back of a fancy dress while attending a charity event attended by New York and Hollywood elites with tickets that cost $35,000 a pop.

Republicans on social media questioned why Ocasio-Cortez would attend an event for society’s elite if she wants to tax the rich.

Sen. Rich Scott, R-Fla., said in a tweet Tuesday that Ocasio-Cortez “wants to tax the rich but took time out of her busy schedule to hob knob with NY and Hollywood elites who paid $30k to attend the #MetGala (and deduct it from their taxes).”

Larry Elder, the conservative talk radio host running against Gov. Gavin Newsom in California’s recall election, tweeted the headline of an article about Ocasio-Cortez’s dress with the accompanying hashtag “#WeveGotACountryToSave.”

Florida’s Lt. Gov. Jeanette Nunez also took to Twitter Monday night saying, “Only in America where a self-described Democratic socialist can wear a $10k “tax the rich” dress, pay $30k for a ticket, and be praised as a champion for the poor. Champagne socialists like AOC are far removed from reality.”

Ocasio-Cortez was quick to respond, explaining on social media that New York City elected officials are often invited to the gala and attend “due to our responsibilities in overseeing our city’s cultural institutions that serve the public” — pointing out that she was one of several of the city’s politicians in attendance.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., were also present at the annual event, which was canceled last year due to the coronavirus.

Ocasio-Cortez also made note on her Instagram account that the dress was borrowed from designer Aurora James, who attended the gala along with the congresswoman.

James is the founder of Brother Vellies, a clothing brand focused on traditional African designs and sustainability, and the 15 Percent Pledge, a nonprofit that challenges major retailers to commit a minimum of 15% of their shelf space to Black-owned businesses, according to their respective websites.

In an interview during Vogue’s livestream of the gala, Ocasio-Cortez and James explained the idea behind the controversial dress.

“We really started having a conversation about what it means to be working-class women of color at the Met, and we said, ‘We can’t just play along, but we need to break the fourth wall and challenge some of the institutions,'” Ocasio-Cortez said. “And while the Met is known for its spectacle, we should have a conversation about it.”

Ocasio-Cortez, on Instagram, said, “The time is now for childcare, healthcare, and climate action for all. Tax the Rich.”

On CNN Tuesday morning, James reiterated that the concept behind the gown was to bring the message of economic justice to a gathering of the wealthy.

“The Met Gala is obviously one of the most exclusive events in the world, and we wanted to come and deliver a message. And I think when we talk about inclusion and gaining access to closed rooms for people of color, when you finally get a seat at the table you have to decide what the message is that you want to deliver,” James said. “I think for the congresswoman, I think for myself, economic equality and economic justice is sort of top of mind.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Justice Stephen Breyer said Tuesday the Supreme Court’s recent 5-4 decision allowing Texas to effectively ban abortion across the state was “very bad” but not politically motivated.

“We don’t trade votes, and members of the court have different judicial philosophies,” Breyer, the court’s most senior liberal justice, told George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

“Some emphasize more text. … Some, like me, probably emphasize more purposes. And the great divisions are probably much more along those lines than what we would think of as political lines,” Breyer said.

“I thought that was a very bad decision and I dissented,” he said.

The court’s denial of the request from Texas abortion providers to temporarily put state law SB8 on hold also drew sharp criticism from Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who wrote in dissent that the court chose to “ignore its constitutional obligations … the sanctity of its precedents and of the rule of law.”

Breyer explained that “a rule of law means you sometimes follow decisions you don’t like.”

The 83-year-old justice has published a new book — “The Authority of the Court and the Peril of Politics” — defending the Supreme Court as a nonpartisan institution whose power depends on credibility among Americans of all viewpoints.

“That’s a treasure, and it’s been built up over many many years,” Breyer told Stephanopoulos.

“I am worried if people don’t understand it,” he said, “they won’t have trust in our institutions. And if they don’t have trust in institutions, it becomes difficult if not impossible to live in a society of 331 million people of tremendous diversity.”

Breyer, the court’s oldest member, has come under intense pressure from progressives to step down while Democrats control the Senate and White House.

He told GMA that he is thinking about retirement but has not yet made a decision on timing.

“There are many different considerations,” Breyer said. “I do not intend to die there on the court; I hope not.”

Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.