Senate Floor

Secretary will call the roll.

[Roll Call]

A quorum is present. Senators, we are getting started. If we can kindly return to our seats. We'll be led in prayer this morning by Sister Michelle Gorman, after which I will lead the Pledge of Allegiance. Sister.

So we gather in God's presence as you leave for summer recession. Let us pray in thanksgiving for all you have accomplished so far this year. In gratitude for the mercy in your leadership, the wisdom in your decisions, the justice in your actions, the integrity in your governing going forward.

May you experience awe in each encounter, in each embrace. Welcome in all suffering, tenderness in all conflict, peace. May God grant you joy in your loved ones. For your own heart, love. For your fidelity, gratitude. And for your service, blessing. We pray this blessing and in the many names of God. Amen.

Please join me in the pledge. I pledge allegiance. Messages from the Governor will deem red. Messages from the Assembly will be deemed read. Reports of Committee will be deemed read and amendments adopted. Moving on to motions, resolutions and notices. Senator. Dr. Weber Pierson, you're recognized.

Thank you. Madam President, I request unanimous consent to return SB 39 to the Assembly for further action.

Without objection. The desk is noted under double action. Do pass as amended. Without objection. Measures reported From Policy Committees July 17, 2025 to July 25, 2025 with the recommendation do pass as amended and re refer to Appropriations to Will be giving their second reading upon being reported. Amendments adopted, published and we refer to Appropriations. Senator Wiener, you're recognized.

Thank you, Madam President. I move to suspend Senate Rule 29.4 as it relates to AB138.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Niello, you're recognized on this item.

Thank you. Thank you. Madam President, I think it's important to acknowledge the reason for this requirement in the first place is to provide the LAO adequate time to provide us analysis of a memorandum of understanding.

And the short time allowed prohibits that we don't have full analyses of these MOUs, which basically means in some cases we're accepting whatever the Governor negotiates with employee groups, which is contrary to to what our oversight rule is. I object to the motion.

Senator Wiener is asking for an aye Vote. Senator Niello is acting asking for a no vote. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 24. noes 8. Senate rules are suspended. Would any other Member like to be recognized under motions? Senator Durazo?

Yes, Madam President. I rise to remove AB 1327 from consent at the request of the author for the purpose of amendments. And I rise to remove AB 1275 from consent at the request of the author for the purpose of amendments.

The desk has noted both items, Senator Caballero.

Thank you, Madam President. I raised to request that AB 1322. By the Assembly Committee on Agriculture be pulled off the consent calendar at the request of the Committee

See no other Member wish to be recognized here. Members without objection. We will now move to Assembly third reading to take up file item 196. AB104 and file item 198. AB138. Senator Wiener is prepared. Secretary, please read file item 196.

Assembly Bill 104 by Assembly Member Gabriel an act relating to the state budget may make an appropriation therefore to take effect immediately. Budget Bill,

Senator Wiener.

Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues, AB104 is a budget Bill junior amending the Budget Act of 2025. The Bill extends the repayment period for a loan provided to a non designated public hospital under the non designated public Hospital loan Program administered by the California Health Facilities Financing Authority.

It reappropriates funding for in prison programming at CDCR and for various capital outlay projects and makes a variety of other technical changes and corrections. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

See no mics up on this item. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes. 29, nos. 3, the measure passes. Senators, we're currently asking that you stay in the chambers. We're going to be voting for the next two and a half hours. We'd like to go as smooth as possible. Taking a quick pause right now. Senator Wiener, you have filed item 198.

Assembly Bill 138 by the Assembly Committee on Budget an act relating to the state employment and making an appropriation, therefore to take effect immediately. Bill related to the budget.

Senator Wiener.

Thank you, Madam President. AB138 is another is a budget trailer Bill. Excuse me, related to state employee contracts. The measure does three things. It ratifies the new contract with bargaining unit 16, represented by the Union of Physicians and Dentists. Ratifies a one year suspension of the return to office Executive order for the Members of professional scientists caps.

And finally, the measure codifies the 16 labor agreements that were signed between June 21 and June 30 and that were deemed approved or ratified by SB139, which was passed last month as part of the budget package. I request an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. I see no mics up on this file item. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes. 28, nos. 9 measure passes Members without objection. We will now move to unfinished business to take up file item 76, SB119, which the Senator is ready for.

Senate Bill 119 by the Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review an act relating to public social services and making an appropriation therefore to take effect immediately. Bill related to the budget.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues. SB 119 is a human services trailer Bill. It includes provisions that were not captured in the earlier trailer Bill as follows. It makes implementation of the tiered rate structure for foster care subject to appropriation in 2027, consistent with the Budget act agreement. It includes various changes to streamline the CalWORKS program experience.

These changes are associated with net General Fund savings of approximately $17 million.

The trailer Bill also includes language to implement $200,000 General Fund for the development of a CalFresh strategic plan to maximize CalFresh benefits and language to implement 600,000 General Fund for the creation of a standardized curriculum for mandated reporters and child welfare which will be available in optional to mandated reporters across the state.

The Bill also extends a waiver of local match requirements for the bringing families home and home safe programs in line with augmentations in the 2025 Budget Act. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. See? No mics up. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes. 28 noes 9. The measure passes. We're going to move back to privileges of the floor. Senator Valladares, you are recognized.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, this morning I am happy to introduce Junior Alvarez and his sons Benjamin and Samuel. Junior is a teacher with the San Bernardino County Superintendent's Office and his wife Marisol is a proud business owner of Sanchez Enterprises. They're in my district. Please join me in welcoming this morning

Welcome to the California State Senate. Moving into consideration of the daily file, we have items 1 through 58 under the Members without objection, we will now move to Senate third reading to take up file item 100 SCR 99. The Senator is ready Secretary, please read.

Senate Concurrent Resolution 99 by Senator Allen relative to Eunice Newton Foote.

Senator.

Thank you so much. Madam President. Members, I rise today to present SCR 99, which recognizes the profound contributions of a long overlooked figure in our scientific history by marking today that would be her exact birthday, as Eunice Newton Foote Day.

This resolution corrects decades of oversight by acknowledging Eunice Newton Foote as the founder of modern climate science and the first researcher to demonstrate the effects of greenhouse gases on Earth's climate.

Beyond her role as a groundbreaking scientist and the first American woman to have her work on physics published in a scientific journal, Eunice was a gifted inventor and a central figure in the women's suffrage movement.

Alongside Elizabeth Cady Stanton and other icons of the movement, Eunice helped to organize and publish the project proceedings to the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 and was one of the first signatories to the Declaration of Sentiments, the convention's call for social, legal and electoral equality for women in the United States.

Born Eunice Newton, she inherited her maiden name from the same family as Sir Isaac Newton and was a talented scientific researcher in her own right. Despite the incredible barriers to women in her time.

Receiving a scientific education, she started doing scientific experiments and was able to isolate various gases in glass chambers and studied the absorption and retention of heat from the sun's rays. She demonstrated that the chamber of carbon dioxide both reached a higher temperature and took significantly longer to cool than the others.

In her paper on the warming impact of carbon dioxide, Yunus wrote, an atmosphere of that gas give give to our Earth a higher temperature, and she noted that if our atmosphere had a higher proportion of carbon dioxide, an increased temperature from its own action as well as from increased weight might have necessarily resulted.

Though her paper had to be presented by one of her male colleagues to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Publication of her experiments marked the first time any scientist, man or woman had demonstrated the warming effect of carbon dioxide in the atmospheric and Members. This was in the mid19th century.

While many in the scientific community were unwilling to take seriously the contributions of a woman, the next issue of Scientific American covered Eunice's paper as quote 1 which would do honor to men of the highest scientific reputation, writing that the experiments of Ms.

Foot afford abundant evidence of the ability of women to investigate any subject with originality and precision.

Eunice was years ahead of the scientific community and understanding the effect increased greenhouse gases would have on the atmosphere, including John Tyndall, who, despite publishing his experiments three years after Eunice and without Reference to carbon dioxide or the climate would be credited as the father of climate science for decades.

Though a few modern historians have written about Eunice as a feminist leader and a groundbreaking scientific researcher, the mantle of the mother of climate science would likely never have been returned to its rightful honoree without the help of Ray Swan.

In 2011, Ray, a retired geologist and collector, was looking through his copy of the annual of scientific discovery of 1857, which happened to be the year that detailed the experiments and debut publication of Eunice Foote. Ray recognized her work demonstrated the greenhouse effect three years prior to its supposed discovery by Tyndall.

Ray published his findings to set the historical record straight. The impact of her work is twofold. Not only did she demonstrate unequivocally to her contemporaries that women were, of course, capable of profound breakthroughs in the sciences, and she fought to open doors for all those who came after her.

But the long delayed rediscovery of her contributions also highlighted just how many brilliant women have been overwritten by their male counterparts. In our history books, she detailed in plain English the significance of her research in climate science over a century before the scientific community began to grapple with the consequences of a warming planet.

The remarkable women behind so many innovations, advancements and cultural phenomena deserve to be remembered by history. And though it is just one small piece of the larger effort, this resolution helps my daughter and her generation see role models like Eunice Newton Foote behind our greatest achievements in science. So thank you, Members.

Today, though it is nearly 170 years overdue, please join me in honoring the mother of modern climate science and recognizing Eunice Newton Foot Day. I respectfully ask her. I vote on Ser 99.

Colleagues, I know we all have worms in our pants. It's our last day. Senior Iris respectfully asking that all conversations be removed from the floor to the back of the chamber so we can get out of here as quickly as possible. Senator Blakespear, you're recognized.

Yes, thank you, Madam President. I would also like to add my voice to recognizing the life and legacy of Eunice Newton Foote and add my support to proclaiming today as her birthday, July 17, her actual birthday.

And I'd like to recognize my colleague from Santa Monica for unearthing this story and bringing it forward to us on the floor of the Senate.

When I use my gender lens, one of the areas that I feel it's so clear that we continue to have just a tremendous amount of sexism in our environment is when you read obituaries. The number of obituaries about men which are contemporaneous, that show what people have done in their lifetime.

It is literally 80% to 20% when you start looking at that. And this recognition on the floor of the State Senate for 170 years overdue.

But a woman who was a leader in climate science before it was even a thing in the mid 19th century, as my good colleague said, really recognizes that women have been active in these important societal questions, of course, for many years, for decades and decades here in America. And it's important that we recognize them.

So I wanted to start stand today to support what my colleague has said and also to raise the profile of this remarkable woman, Eunice Newton Foote. Thank you.

Thank you. Senator Allen, you may close.

I appreciate the comments of my colleague who was on a panel with me just a few weeks ago relating to a film that highlighted her work. We're actually going to introduce the filmmaker in just a moment. Thank you. And I respectfully, ask for an aye vote.

Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

Ayes. 37, nos. 0. The resolution is adopted. Senator Allen, please move forward with your introduction.

Well, thank you so much, Madam President. So, in celebration of newly declared Eunice Newton Foot Day, I have the privilege of welcoming to the Senate Kathy Kasich, who's a gifted scientist and an award winning documentary filmmaker.

She began her education in the sciences getting her undergraduate master's degrees in biology before returning to earn her Master's of Fine Arts in science documentary filmmaking. Since then, she's worked with the BBC, National Geographic and the Smithsonian to do justice to the science that she loves.

She's currently helping to run Sacramento State's MFA program for science and natural history filmmaking. Kathy's work has always been driven by her awe and fascination for the natural world. And her curiosity has led her to capture the remarkable stories that our environment holds, both about our relationship to nature and about the world before.

In her pursuit of those stories, Kathy has found herself exploring subglacial lakes in Antarctica, recording frogs in the rainforest of Ecuador, studying the depths of Greenland's Ayes sheet, garnering well deserved festival awards and accolades along the way.

And her most recent film, the Memory of Darkness, Light and Ayes unravels 400,000 years of climate history etched into the Ayes of Greenland. And it directly highlights the work of Eunice Newton Foote. As the foundation for the work that Kathy and her colleagues are doing. The film has been honored with multiple awards.

It's been shown at this year's annual meeting, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the very same meeting at which Eunice watched a male colleague present her groundbreaking paper in 1856. Kathy is not only elevating Eunice Newton Foot's legacy, but is one of the many remarkable women following in her tradition of exploration and discovery.

Senator Blakespear and I had, along with Senator McNerney as well, we had the honor of going to a film screening and then serving on a panel with Kathy. And whether it's in the polar Ayes caps or in our backyard at the American River. And she's now making a film. Her next film is about the American River.

Her efforts better understand and share the science and beauty of nature honor both the legacy and spirit of Ms. Foot. Members, please join me in welcoming Kathy Kasek to the California Senate Floor.

Now moving into the consideration of the daily file. Under second reading file, we have items 1 through 58. Secretary, please read

[Second reading]

Will be deemed read. Second reading File will be deemed Moving into Senate third reading, we have items 90 and 94, starting with file item 90. Senator Cortese ready to go. Secretary, please read.

Senate Joint Resolution 6 by Senator Cortese relative to federal funding.

Senator.

Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues at rise to present SJR6 urging President Trump and Congress to uphold the historic investments made possible by the bipartisan infrastructure law, the CHIPS and Science act and the Inflation Reduction Act. These three laws represent some of the most consequential federal investments in infrastructure, innovation, clean energy and economic development in our country's history.

And they've had enormous benefits here in California, including over $63 billion in bipartisan infrastructure law funds awarded to California, not including direct awards to our cities, counties and special districts. Over $1.2 billion to support Clean hydrogen production through the Arches project and more than 3.1 billion to support California's high speed rail construction through the Inflation reduction act.

Over $1 billion has been sent to California ports to modernize and reduce emissions. And $5 billion allocated nationally for Wildfire Resilience, which clearly directly benefits our state. In just the first few months of 202542,000 jobs nationwide, including over 1300 jobs right here in California, were lost due to policy reversals under these laws.

SJR6 makes it clear California stands firmly behind these investments and the communities they support. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Senator. Seeing no mics up on this item. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll call]

Ayes 26, noes 6. The resolution. Resolution is Adopted. Moving on to file item 94, Senator Cervantes. She is ready to go. Secretary, please read

Senate Joint Resolution 7 by Senator Cervantes relative to tariffs.

Senator. Thank you, Madam President, and Members, for allowing me to present Senate Resolution 7 today. For nearly a century, support for free trade in our country has been a bipartisan cornerstone of American economic policy. Republican presidents from Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan championed open markets. In 1988, a radio address, President Reagan said, permission to read. Without objection.

One of the key factors beyond our nation's great prosperity is the open trade policy that allows the American people to freely exchange goods and services with free people around the world. That is why SJR7 presents us with a simple but urgent choice.

Do we fight for the economic well being of the people we represent, or do we sit by while their paychecks shrink and costs rise? On April 2, President Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers act to impose a sweeping 10% tariff on all imports from nearly every country on Earth. Even with even higher rates on 57 nations.

Let's be clear about what this means. Americans are now paying more for everyday essentials like bananas, coffee and toilet paper, not because of supply chains, not because of global instability, but because of a political decision made by President Trump. Tariffs are taxes, and they fuel inflation.

The nonpartisan budget lab at Yale projects that these tariffs will cost the average American household up to $2,800 per month per year. That's money that doesn't go to groceries, rents or savings. And according to the new data from the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Consumer Price index increased by 2.7% in June alone.

And that's before the next round of tariffs take effect. Inflation isn't just happening. It's being driven by policies like these. And unless Congress intervenes, it will only get worse. You don't have to take my word for it. The President of the California Manufacturers and Technology Association called the tariffs attacks on the consumers here in this country.

They are also devastating to small businesses, the lifeblood of our economy. After these tariffs were imposed, the President of the CEO of the United States Chamber of Commerce warned that many small businesses will suffer irreparable harm. One such small business owner in Grass Valley recently wrote in Yuba Net. Permission to read without objection?

Our biggest challenge right now is dealing with tariffs. Pointless, destructive tariffs introduced by President Trump. These tariffs were dropped on us out of nowhere, with no warning and no logic. And we've been left to figure out how to survive. And you can see the damage on a much larger scale.

At the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the largest port complex in the United States. In May 2025, shipping volume had fallen 140%. President Trump called that a good thing. Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Californians whose jobs rely on those ports.

These tariffs are not just hurting our families and small businesses, they are weakening our position in the world. In May, Japan and South Korea, two of our closest allies, issued a joint statement pledging greater financial cooperation with China. Let that sink in. Trump's trade war is pushing our allies into China's arms.

And while it is true that President Biden maintained some of the tariffs that carried over from President Trump's first term, President Biden primarily imposed tariffs on China and even then on specific goods and industries in China. And most importantly, President Biden did not impose tariffs on vital allies like Canada and Members of the European Union.

Trump's tariffs by contract are indiscriminate, even extending to The Herd and Mcdonald's island, which are inhibited only by penguins and seals. So while this Legislature works to reduce the cost of living and took a generational step towards addressing our state's housing crisis, the Federal Government is actively undermining that progress.

The National Association of Home Builders estimates that tariffs will raise the price of building materials, leading to an increase in the average price of a new home by $9,200. When I first ran for this Legislature, I did so to represent the hard working families of the Inland Empire.

Families who care less about partisan fights and more about making ends meet. They want solutions. By passing SJR7, we send a clear message to Washington. These tariffs are causing real harm to working families and small businesses across California. They must end. This is not about left or right. It is about up or down.

Are prices going up or are they coming down? Are our small businesses going under or are they getting relief? Tariffs are a tax. I respectfully asked for your aye vote on Senate Resolution 7. Thank you, Senator.

Moving into debate, Senator Seyarto, please kick us off.

Thank you very much, Madam President and colleagues. So 1913 was the last year that a President made any progress on paying down the national debt. Prior to 1913, we had tariffs. After 1913, they incorporated an income tax.

And that income tax for the last hundred and some odd years has not been able to pay off our national debt. For the last six months, seven months now, we have heard a lot of prognication or pros. Well. I can't remember the word right now. Can't get it right.

Prognosis, whatever you want to call it that, you know what, we're going to have super high inflation, we're going to have no money in our 401ks because the stock market is dropping where, you know, all of this economic damage.

It sounded like words coming from my two least favorite characters that are fictional, Chicken Little and the other guy, which is the. I'm sorry, it's the boy who cried Wolf. None of those things have come true. Yesterday it was announced that last month we brought in $37 billion from tariffs.

We also have nine pages of companies that are making investments back here in the US And I say the US and not just California, because California is going to maybe get a very small percentage of these because all the other ones are going to other states like Samsung over in sc, which is not Southern California, it's South Carolina.

What do those represent? Those represent well paying jobs. And those well paying jobs pay for food, they pay for housing, they pay for all of the things that we are wringing our hands about and trying to shovel money out to people because they don't have well paying jobs.

When it comes to the Inland Empire, we have a lot of room for all of these people to come out and make their investments here in California. But you know what? In California we can't. You know why?

Because our regulatory environment precludes people from being successful or wanting to take the risk to come here to California to open up more business and risk their investment. So tariffs, we don't know what they do. I don't know too many of us that are experts, maybe some of you are experts in tariffs.

I'm not an expert in tariffs, but we don't seem to know what we're talking about. And this particular resolution, which I will not be joining you on an egg on our face, because so far all of the dire predictions, the stock market losses, all of those dire predictions about economic fallout, some of it might be temporary.

I don't know how many people here have a crystal ball because so far your crystal ball has a crack in it. Maybe what we should be doing in California is positioning ourselves to take advantage of whatever the heck the federal Administration is doing to make sure that we are full participants.

And I don't mean we in this house, I mean we in California. Those people that were dying, they would love to work in a great job, but those great jobs are retail jobs right now because that's all we're getting. A little bit of hospitality, a little bit of retail.

And as for ships coming on on into our ports, that's because they're bringing goods from other nations and bringing them here. And by the way, if we're really worried about climate control, that's probably something that we ought to be looking at. But all of a sudden if the ships are bringing them in from other countries, that's fine.

Tariffs have been used by other countries against us. This free trade notion. Yeah, what a great notion.

But you know what, if other people are not doing free trade, if we're paying for it already, maybe what we need is some leverage to try to get them to believe in the same free trade that we are talking about here. But you know what? We're not doing that.

What I see the federal Administration doing right now is trying to get leverage so that they can rebalance this trade nonsense that has cost us billions of dollars and put us $37 trillion in debt. How in the heck are we ever going to pay that if we don't reverse that trend?

Well, last month is a step towards reversing that trend. And until we know exactly what these do and don't do, it is premature for us to weigh in and poke the bear again and send the signal that California wants nothing to do with the successes that may come. And I say may come because guess what?

I don't, I can't predict either. I don't have the crystal ball. But what I do see is more optimistic in terms of what the economy is bringing us. Like a stock market that is hovering, hovering right now around its all time highs. Two months ago we were all crying because zero my God, our 401ks are gone.

That is not true. They are not gone. Anybody that has been around longer than 50 years understands the economic cycles, the reaction of the stock market to emotions and things like that. Well, where is it you guys? Where is it? Do you really know that people are suffering? I don't know.

People in my district, I don't see them being battered by these tariffs as much as we said they would be. And that's part of the problem. If we run around in California and tell everybody, hey, you know, you're about to get. It puts fear into them.

That's our favorite thing to do because fear creates unrest and unrest means something for us to talk about. Well, you know what? I don't want to talk about stuff that I don't know a lot about, but I do know a lot about this.

We have to do something different to stimulate our economy than what has been going on in the last four years. We have to do something different to be able to allow people to afford homes than we have been doing here in California for the last 10 years. So let's stop with the bashing of the Trump Administration.

Let's start looking for ways to be successful within that and take advantage of that. Maybe we should form some relationships that will enable us to get a little bit of that $37 billion from last month and who knows what it'll be at the end of the year.

But right now we have $2.4 trillion in potential investment promises made by nine pages of companies. Nine pages. And you know what? We're not poised to take advantage of any of them. I would recommend a no vote on this so that we don't shoot ourselves in the foot or have egg on our face.

Because that's why I'm not going to have my name on this. Thank you.

Senator Blakespear you are Recognized.

Thank you, Madam President. I rise today to urge support for SJR7. I wanted to make clear that Californians will be bearing the burden of this administration's economic policies. The Yale Budget Lab projects that the President's tariffs could result in almost $3,000 in additional expenses in a year for each household.

For a family of four at the federal poverty line, that is a nearly 10% increase in their expenses, which far outstrips the pace of inflation. As always, poor decision making at the top hits the already disadvantaged the hardest.

More than the tariffs themselves, the uncertainty, the mixed messages, the go no go is causing chaos in our economy and imperiling American businesses ability to to make critical long term decisions about their operations. It has also destroyed trust with our closest trading partners like Mexico, who is a big partner to the San Diego region.

As the President bluff, charges, bloviates and browbeats our closest friends, the rest of the world is cutting America out of their trade agreements, leaving us poorer, more isolated and less prepared to weather future economic events. These tariffs are lose, lose for all involved with.

We may not see every effect in these first moments, but listen to the economic experts and the consequences are coming. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Senator Niello. You're recognized.

Thank you, Madam President. I'm going to probably bring a bit different perspective to this than perhaps anybody else that speaks. I'm not sure I am fundamentally in agreement with regard to the problems of tariffs. I have been opposed to the current tariff regime. I am a free market economist dyed in the wool free market economist.

But I have to ask, is this resolution in opposition to tariffs or just President Trump's tariffs? Because President Biden extended continued tariffs imposed by President Trump in his first term and inflation spiked during the Biden presidency. I don't recall seeing a resolution of this sort saying that sort of thing during that time. But perhaps I digress.

I'd like to point out a couple of inaccuracies. I told the gentle lady from Riverside that I could have supported her resolution with were it not for some of the inaccuracies. One was citing Project 2025 on tariffs. Project 2025 document is hundreds of pages long with multiple opinions on certain subjects and tariffs was one of them.

Peter Navarro wrote, wrote an essay in Project 2025 about his fair trade philosophy, which basically is imposed tariffs on everybody. Of course, Elon Musk famously attacked the intelligence of Peter Navarro. I don't know if anybody heard that. It was rather humorous. I'm not going to quote it here.

I won't attack his intelligence, but I will say with regard to, to trade issues, he is profoundly misguided. But there was another essay in Project 2025 by Kent Lassman which promoted a total free trade policy that just hasn't been followed. The resolution also cites that the stock market tanked with the imposition of tariffs.

Well, it has since completely recovered and then some. So perhaps the resolution was drafted then and not updated. But as I said, were it not for some of the inaccuracies I could have supported. I think that the tariff policy that we're seeing now is profoundly misguided.

And I would point out that during all of the time when we were supposedly taken advantage of by other countries, our per capita income and per capita wealth increased beyond that of the rest of the world. Bring me back some of that stuff.

But on the issue of affordability, the high cost of living is driven by inflation and yes, tariffs, but we have no control over that. This resolution will have no effect in Washington, D.C. I think we all know that it is largely, as has been pointed out, a criticism of President Trump, more so than it is of tariffs.

Cost of living is an important issue, but we have an impact on cost of living here. State mandated regulations also drive high cost of living in California and we absolutely can do something about that, but we don't. So I cannot support this resolution because it is not just simply an anti tariff resolution. I urge a no vote.

Thank you very much, Madam President and colleagues. I rise in support just to point out and to remind us that American trade policy and the application of tariff structures are complex. They are delicately balanced and usually prudently applied.

That has historically been the case because of the complex nature, different regions of global trade, the different postures and capacities and product lines, and on and on of many of our trading partners around the world. It has been often a tool of American foreign policy as much as trade and economic policy.

When it is applied prudently, with reason and consistency, it can be a tool to appropriately encourage robust trade considering a multitude of factors. It has never in modern history been applied, for lack of a better word, in a rudimentary, one dimensional, simplistic manner. The way that this Administration applies it and facts are stubborn things.

Our monetary and trade policy has always been designed to seek maximum benefit for the American people. Not in the long term.

According to many of the studies and peer reviewed sources cited in the resolution, that would increase long term prices on goods, reduce the average purchasing power per household in the United States, increase inflationary pressures on our key North American export trading partners like Canada and Mexico, and hit low income households incrementally in a way that is unjust and just not smart.

With regard to the agricultural industry, one of our strengths in the State of California, a number of peer reviewed analyses indicate that annual export losses just in that sector alone could exceed $4 billion annually in California's agricultural sector. This is not wise, this is not prudent, this is not delicately balanced.

It is reckless and it has encouraged neck breaking back and forth and instability that in the long run will only harm the American people, people in California and people who can least afford it. I respectfully asked for an aye vote.

Colleagues. So you know who's up? Senator Strickland, Senator Limon and Senator Choi. Senator Strickland.

Thank you, Madam President. Members, I'm really glad and happy here today that my colleagues support President Reagan and Art Laffert's free market capitalism. I do also am a Reagan Republican that supports free trade, but true free trade. It is not free trade when other countries don't open up their markets and goods and services to our products. And that's where we were before President Trump got elected.

What President Trump is trying to do is get to a free market, a capitalist economy, by creating leverage to put the exact kind of tariffs on other countries that they put on our products to hopefully get down to a true free market for everybody to have zero and true free market capitalism.

But after the debate I'm hearing today, I just came up with an idea. Let's call all taxes that everybody proposes in this building a tariff so we could lighten the tax burden on all California residents.

So from now on, when you propose your taxes, I'm going to call it a tariff, and hopefully you second guess yourself and lighten the tax burden on all Californians. We have an opportunity here in California also, when we see what's going on in the federal side and the Federal Government.

Let's take, for example, the timber industry here in California. The timber industry used to be very robust, but we shut that down due to over regulation, and now we buy all our timber from Canada. Well, what's going on today?

We should think about this in the Legislature and say, you know, why are we buying our timber from Canada when we have a robust industry right here in California? We can create those jobs right here in California and fire up those timber mills up in Senator Dahle's district.

And Members, there's a lot of hyperbole going on here about the Administration. I understand many of you don't like the current President, but let's look at some of the facts. The New York Post reported two days ago that the LA Port has had the highest imports for June in written history. Let me repeat myself.

New York Post just reported a couple days ago that the LA Port has had the highest imports for June in written history. So a lot of the hyperbole you have here in this building is just not coming to fruition. Members, let's get back focused on California and let's work to do what we can here in California.

I know there's a obsession here in this body to do whatever you can to try to blame someone else for the lack of our budget deficits, things that we've overspent. Only in politics can you do a poor job and try to deflect and blame someone else.

Let's look in the mirror, Members, let's work with each other and try to be a stronger voice for California and California residents. I urge your no vote.

Thank you. Members, today I rise in support of SJR7. It is true that we must bring more manufacturing jobs back to the United States. They are the jobs that often lead and pave the way to our middle class. They provide upward mobility for families and entire communities across the country. This is true and this is important.

However, the tariffs imposed by the Federal Administration are not enough to just achieve this goal of bringing back all of the jobs to the United States. It takes investment, it takes long term commitment to bring these job backs, to build an industrial supply chain to become competitive.

These tariffs skip an essential step by not giving American workers and businesses needed support to build that infrastructure.

There is an opportunity to incentivize and build up domestic production through policies like the CHIPS act, funding incentives, tax credits, research and workforce training to build up the domestic industry instead of building infrastructure opportunities for our communities, for our state and our country, for new businesses, for workers, these tariffs punish our communities who need to buy essential goods without any domestic alternative.

The tariffs will have indeed a disproportionate impact on our working class and low income Americans who spent a large percent of their paycheck on essentials. These tariffs are expected to cost households up to $40 billion. Members, let's bring back jobs.

Let's build the infrastructure for workers in our country and let's acknowledge that the tariffs miss every step to build and to create and to advance our workforce in domestic our domestic workforce without addressing the needs of our country and only increasing cost for American families. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Senator Choi, you're next. Senator Wiener, you're on deck.

Thank you, Madam President and the Members. I rise today in respect for opposition to SJR7. This is a non binding resolution that calls for the walking back of the President's tariffs. This is just one more example of political posturing and not solving the real problems Californians face.

Earlier this year, the Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee discussed SB263, authored by the Majority Leader, which would actually task our state agencies to study the impacts of the tariffs. That Bill included declarations stating that federal tariffs may increase the cost of doing businesses for California companies.

But this resolution definitely states that the tariffs will increase the cost of the everyday goods. According to NPR, in the June 19 article they state permission to read without objection. It said there is already evidence that the tariffs are helping the government's bottom line.

The Federal Government collected $68.9 billion in tariffs and excise tax within the first five months of 2025, which is a 78% increase. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects that if the tariffs are in place for a full decade, the Federal Government can get rid of get rid of $2.8 trillion in federal debt that we are currently having.

$36.6 trillion in national debt. This is our children and our grandchildren that will be burdened by our national debt. I believe we should be cautious and mindful when it comes to these tariffs. We must study the true impacts before making a determination that they are harmful to California residents. For these reasons, I cannot support SJR7 and urge a no vote.

Senator Wiener, Senator Cortese, you're up next.

Thank you very much, Madam President. I rise in support of SJR7. You know, a lot has been said about why these tariffs in particular are so destructive to the US Economy. We can have a thoughtful conversation about tariffs. Tariffs play an important role.

But the harm that these tariffs are doing in terms of increasing the cost of living in the US it's significant. And I appreciate the thoughtful comments from my colleagues explaining why that is the case.

But in addition to the extreme harm that the President is doing to this country by threatening and declaring all of these trade wars, there's an additional extreme harm to the United States. So much of the power and the wealth and the prosperity of this country is because of our standing in the world.

It's because of our international relationships, trading relationships with very close allies. Like Canada, like Mexico, like various countries in East Asia, in Europe, that contributes hugely to the success and the prosperity of this country and to our leadership in the world.

It's one of the reasons why this country, whatever the mistakes that this country has made over time, there's so much admiration towards the US around the world, or at least there was before Donald Trump came into office and decided to blow it all up and to spit in the eye of our closest allies and to send clear signals that the United States was no longer a reliable ally or trading partner.

And these tariffs are part of that. And so what he is doing is very destructive. Beyond the economic harms and the long term repercussions of other countries no longer viewing us as reliable partners and allies, I don't think we even fully appreciate those long term harms.

The other thing I want to say, and what makes, what makes this even worse, it's bad enough to declare a trade war, especially with some of our closest partners, but it's also the way that this President is doing it. It's hyper chaotic.

And one of the reasons it's chaotic because he's incompetent, but it's also chaotic because this isn't just about trade policy or economic policy. It's about this President wanting to be perceived as an alpha male. Right.

It's about his, you know, the sort of this, you know, he wants everyone to think he has more testosterone than everyone else, but he's constantly getting played. He gets played by China, he gets played by Putin, he gets played by everyone because he, he can be like King Kong and like pounding his chest all he wants.

He's just not very good at it. And in the end, we know that Taco is a thing Trump always chickens out. I asked for an aye vote.

Senator Cortese, you're recognized.

Thank you. Madam President and colleagues, I rise in support of SJR7 as a co author and I want to thank the author, our colleague from Riverside, for bringing this to our attention and I think doing a masterful job of making sure the resolution before us doesn't involve ad hominent attacks on the President of the United States or anyone else for that matter, and doesn't take a broad, sweeping approach that all tariffs are bad.

If you really read the resolution, what it's saying is that we in the State of California do and should be opposing tariffs that harm the middle class, California's middle income Americans. It's imperative that we urge President Trump to rescind tariffs he's placed on foreign countries which are negatively impacting American workers, consumers and small businesses. That's the point.

Nothing in that resolution says all tariffs are bad, but tariffs that impact American workers, consumers and small businesses, the very folks we're trying to uplift lift here in the state Legislature day after day. And these impacts will continue to worsen in the very near future if those decisions aren't reversed. That kind of an approach hasn't been taken.

California residents are going to find it's more difficult to buy a home while we're trying to deal with a housing affordability crisis and a housing production crisis. It's more difficult because building materials are becoming more expensive due to the tariffs. It's not just the tariffs.

It's the retaliation from countries who are responding to the tariffs that we place on them. That's undeniable. We're seeing that whipsaw effect in every news feed. Our farmers who are already experiencing worker hardships under this Administration, largely because of immigration policy, are projected to lose billions of dollars in key exports.

I just read in my newsfeed this morning the great news that we have more almond production this year in California than ever before in history. And the news feed points out that that almond production is largely exported.

There's a little problem there when you're baiting other countries who take those exports from us with high tariffs and they retaliate.

It's very, very likely under this scenario if the Administration doesn't take a more nuanced approach like the resolution is calling for, it's highly likely that you're going to have almonds stored, carried over to next year, which is going to mean layoffs and costs and a reduction in income taxes here in the State of California, which, Oh, by the way, fuel $80 billion more to the Federal Government than we're taking back.

President Trump's tariffs and the resulting economic instability are expected to put various California jobs at risk. We know that. I've had the privilege of speaking not only to workers, but folks from the Supply Chain Association.

I had the honor of serving on a panel with the treasurer and other officials here, including from Go Biz, dealing with their questions about supply chain impact based on these tariffs. You know what they are saying? They're not even going to the detail of this resolution.

They're saying nobody is coming to us from the federal Administration doing scenario planning so that we can figure out what the ultimate impact's going to be of the export import changes.

If you can really demonstrate that exports are going to increase because we brought nine pages of American jobs back Here, then why not sit down with those port authorities and explain that to them and let them know what they're going to need to do to survive the interim period while we're suffering and they are suffering.

The resolution is correct when it speaks to a 40% drop in those ports volume right now. One more example, maybe two, but one more. The wine industry as we all know it in California is a global enterprise, a multi $1.0 billion enterprise, another 80 $1.0 billion enterprise.

You can't get cork for the wine industry and I'm sure my colleagues who represent that area know it because it comes from Portugal. And guess who got a big tariff slapped on them. That creates a problem with them exporting cork into this country, Portugal.

I was approached by the Consul General of Portugal in my own district asking me as a state Senator to try to intervene with the federal Administration to free up their ability. We all may be soon opening wine bottles with twist offs, twist tops because we can't get court. These are the things that don't make sense.

That's nothing to do with an ad homine attack on the President. That has nothing to do with saying all tariffs are bad. They're saying it's stupid. It is stupid to apply a policy that handicaps the economy that's provided you the revenue you need to run this nation.

All of these examples are more cut to the heart of the middle class that we're struggling to grow here in California. I think that's what the resolution says. And if you read it closely, it's speaking to the cost that parents are going to have soon back to school in buying shoes for their children and clothing their children.

And we're talking about affordability here in this Legislature on this floor, day after day after day, while the President of the United States is applying tariffs willy nilly that increase the very cost of people sending their kids to school with one of the most basic needs in a civilized society, putting on a pair of shoes. Thank you. I respectfully ask for your aye vote

Senator Cabaldon.

Thank you, Madam. Thank you, Madam President. Our colleague from Rancho Murrietta argued that we can't possibly know how this is all going to turn out and we should wait. And none of us, absolutely none of us, are experts in tariffs and so we should keep our mouths shut.

Nine years ago, I testified before the International Trade Commission in Washington D.C. this federal agency that oversees tariffs and trade agreements on behalf of all the mayors and state legislators in the country.

I testified alongside the ambassadors of Singapore, Peru and Japan about the impacts of tariffs and Trade agreements back when President Obama was proposing the Trans Pacific Partnership. And my testimony, you might wonder why was a little town mayor at the International Trade Commission.

Well, because the issues that we've talked about today are very real at the ground level. And I want to, for those who don't, who don't think of themselves as experts on tariffs, who think, ah, we're going to stick, we're going to slap tariffs on China or on Europe or on some other place, a tariff is really the same as a domestic sales tax is.

And imagine if Fairfield in my district said, you know what, we're going to stick it to Napa. We're going to stick a 30% tariff on wine from Napa, but we're going to, it's a sales tax.

So from here on out, every person in Fairfield who buys a bottle of wine from Napa will pay a 30% extra sales tax. Then Napa says, okay, you know what? If you're going to do that, we're going to make every Napa resident pay an extra sales tax of 30%.

When they want a Jelly Belly or maybe a Budweiser, they will pay for that. And all the politicians are screaming, we're sticking it to Napa. No, no, we're sticking it to Fairfield. But who is paying that 30% sales tax on the bottle of wine, on the Jelly Belly candy and on the Budweiser?

It is the people of Napa who are now spending 30% more for their Jelly Belly and their Budweiser. It is the people of Fairfield paying 30% more for their wine. Napa and Fairfield, the governments, they don't pay anything. There's not a dollar that they are putting in.

So when we say we're sticking it to some other country, bringing them to the table, all we're doing is paying more ourselves in the form of another sales tax. And one reason we know that's true is because as several Members on this floor have said, the revenue is already coming in.

As has been reported on this floor, there's already $100 billion that have come in in revenue from tariffs. But that $100 billion, China, the government of China has paid zero. The governments of Europe, zero. The government of Japan, zero.

That $100.0 billion was paid by each one of us in the form of tariffs and duties, taxes on the things that we are buying.

So that's not some magic solution to solving the federal deficit to raise 100 billion this year, or if someone said trillions of dollars over the next few years through 30 and 50% tax hikes. As a mayor, if I had proposed a 30% tax hike on my residence, I would have been out of office in a second.

And so when we say tariffs our taxes, it's not some kind of ideological frame on this. This is a real effect that each of us are having.

And I'm shocked that there are those that think that we should be some kind of ultimate nanny state that tells people, no, you should buy, you should buy your lumber from Tehama and not from Canada. You, you don't really need a stroller, do you? Shouldn't you just carry your baby on a back.

That is not for government to decide. And it is shocking to me that, that we would think that it is our role to use the power of taxes to tell people what they can and cannot buy. And then the worst of all is this is all for nothing.

We haven't won a significant trade agreement with any major partner around the country. This Taco notion is very true. So we're paying $100 billion of taxes here in America to support these tariffs without getting anything for it. That is a travesty.

It is a failure of policy, and it is just a backdoor way to raise taxes on every single American to pay for the ballooning budget deficit from the one big Bill. So I actually completely agree with my colleague from Fair Oaks around this issue. Tariffs are taxes.

And I know folks on all sides of the aisles have had issues around them, but the impacts are real. In our communities, tariffs are just another form of sales tax that we are all paying at the highest rates ever. Subsidizing ballooning federal deficit without winning nationally, but making it impossible to get in Canada.

You can't even buy a bottle of wine from California anymore. We're not waiting to see the results. They were cleared off the shelves within hours. And so whether it's the wine industry that I represent or others around the state, as we pay more, we are losing jobs, losing industries, breaking our economic future.

And for those who say, well, it's going to build a manufacturing facility in South Carolina, I'm sorry, our job is to fight for the people and the small businesses, the workers, the consumers of California. These tariffs are destroying our economy. We must fight back. I Urgent I vote.

Colleagues, we have three mics up left and we're going to go do consent calendar and Protems run of the show. Senator Caballero.

Thank you, Madam President and Members. I rise today in strong support for SJR7 by my great colleague from Riverside and to condemn the tariffs by the Federal Administration on our most valuable trading partners. These tariffs are not strategic policies or a solution, but rather a trade war, plain and simple.

And quite frankly, if you look behind it, some of it's just a personal war against some of the other countries. But I want to talk about the impact that these taxes have had on rural California. These tariffs directly impact our farmers, the food supply, and working families in the Central Valley.

At a time when families are already struggling trying to pay the bills, the Central Valley and other agricultural communities feed not only the great State of California, but but the entire nation and the world.

These tariffs threaten the very livelihood of our growers and the ability to provide fresh food products to millions of people all around the world. California is the nation's number one agricultural exporter, with nearly 24 billion in global sales. From almonds to cherries, pistachios, rice, California's agricultural products reach every corner of the globe.

In fact, California is the number one exporter of almonds. And our citrus farmers ship fruit to South Korea, Canada, Japan and beyond. In areas my district, like Reedley, farmers are already reporting declines in sales, declines in sales meaning they can't sell their product. And they're feeling these policies immediately and painfully.

And when important allies like Canada and powerful adversaries like China both retaliate with 25% taxes on American goods, California farmers are the first ones who pay the price. Because that product has to get out.

It's fresh, it has to be consumed, and it can't sit around and wait for the next ship or for six months or 30 days or 90 days to pass. These tariffs not only jeopardize the long term stability of California's $59 billion agricultural industry, but the unpredictability puts farmers at risk of financial disaster and bankruptcy.

You know that every time a farmer invests in growing strawberries, the upfront cost before one strawberry is picked is $25,000 an acre. You have to get a loan to be able to produce that product. And once that product is fresh, it's got to come off immediately and it's got to get to market.

And tariffs absolutely imperil the ability of us of that to happen. We cannot continue to allow reckless tariffs to undermine our global reputation, to hurt our economy and and further exacerbate food insecurity for our children, families, and the most vulnerable communities. The effect of these tariffs will be felt like a ripple effect throughout the world.

And we're paying the price. This resolution urges President Trump to rescind the tariff taxes on our residents who are hurting the most. I Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Madam President. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, today I also rise in strong support of SJR7 and to express my deep concern over the continued threat of these federal tariffs. And the backing down and the threat again. And the backing down and the threat again. This is not a time to play with people's lives.

It has real impact on real Americans and our Californian families. Tariffs may sound like a strategy to protect American industries, but in reality, as many have already expressed, it is a hidden tax. It is a hidden tax. Let's not make a mistake about that.

People are going to pay the price and unfortunately, it is those that are hurting the most that are going to continue to pay the price. And it already hurts my heart to think of all these families who are going to be preparing to go back to school.

As a teacher, many times I found myself having to buy books and clothing and other items to support these families that could barely afford to send their children to school. And I already know that we haven't seen the hit yet. It will come even more when our students are going back to school.

So this is not just a hit to our businesses, but for everyday Americans buying groceries and basic essentials. These policies worsen also inflation, which is already something that we're dealing with, and it also slows down our economy and it threatens the supply chain.

We have yet to see the full impact of these games that are being played at the federal level. People cannot afford these games. And I urge the Federal Government to stop playing games with their families livelihoods. Tariffs threaten our supply chain in a way that we saw during the pandemic.

And I think that's just a small example of we're going to see in the near future. It will definitely drive costs for farmers, manufacturers and consumers alike. And let's be clear, tariffs are not just a tool of the trade. They're a burden on our economy, a strain on so many families and so many of our financial institutions.

We should be working to lower the costs for everyday citizens and not working towards escalating them. I also urge an aye vote. Thank you, Madam President. Senator Arreguin.

Thank you, Madam President. I also rise in support of SGR7 and I want to thank the Senator from Merced for talking about the impact that the current administration's trade policy is having on our agricultural sector in California, which is one of our most important economic sectors in our state.

But I want to talk about this from the other end of the supply chain because I'm Honored to represent Oakland in the California State Senate. Oakland is the number one port for refrigerated cargo.

And all the produce that comes from the Central Valley is actually shipped out of Oakland to markets in Asia and other parts of the country. So I asked support of Oakland while this debate was happening for a few statistics about what's going on since the tariff policy took effect.

One of the oldest, longest standing trucking companies is closing business because costs rise everywhere, which is making it difficult for them to conduct business. And so if the trucking industry folds, how are we going to transport all that produce?

So the port is also seeing less ships to cull because of the uncertainty that these tariff policies have had on our economy. So less ships mean also less jobs for people that are loading and unloading those ships as well. So that impacts the employment of union workers who work at our ports as well.

And so this all has a compounding effect. These tariffs and the economic impact it's having on our state and our country are having a ripple effect in so many ways. They're impacting farmers, they're impacting truckers, they're impacting trade, and they're rising costs for everyday Californians. Make no mistake about it. This is a tax.

This is a tax at a time that when we all across the aisle say that we are concerned about affordability in the state, we're concerned about rising produce costs, we're concerned about rising housing costs. If we're all concerned about that, I urge everyone to vote yes on SGR7.

Thank you, Madam President. And thank you to all my colleagues who rose to speak on this item today. I do want to be clear. The port of LA is seeing shipping volume up because importers are racing to beat the latest tariff deadline by President Trump.

Just this week, the Federal Administration increased tariffs on tomatoes imported by Mexico by 17%. So now the President is making your pizza more expensive. You don't have to fight for American jobs by taxing Americans at the registrar. And so I want to be clear, you don't need a PhD in economics to understand the impact of tariffs. Look at your grocery Bill. I respectfully asked for an aye vote on SJR7.

Thank you, Senator. Secretary, please call the roll.

Aye's 26, noes 8. Resolution is adopted. Moving on to the consent calendar for second day items 207 to 224. And the special consent calendar calendar number 14, items 225228. Would any Member wish to remove an item from the consent calendar? Senator McNerney, you're recognized.

Thank you. Madam President. I would like to remove AB953, file item 216 from the consent calendar for. The purpose of amendment

Without objection the desk has noted. See no other objection or removal. Secretary, please read the Items.

[Consent Calendar]

Secretary, please call the roll on the first item and apply the roll call for all the items in the consent calendars.

[Roll Call]

Ayes 34, no 0. Consent calendar is adopted. Returning to motions and resolutions, this is our time for two aims. To adjourn in memories. If we can give our attention to our Senators. Senator Arreguin.

Thank you, Madam President. I rise today to honor the memory of Dan Siegel, a constituent lawyer and activist who for five decades advocated for the advancement of human rights at home and abroad.

And Dan was a longtime civil rights lawyer fighting for the rights of the homeless, fighting for peace fighting for economic justice, and was known as the President of the UC Berkeley Student Government, where he said, let's take back the park, and actually started a protest march that went down Telegraph Avenue of students and community Members who literally tore down the fences to reclaim People's park as a park and a place of refuge and community in the City of Berkeley.

But he fought so many fights, whether it's fighting for peace, whether it was fighting for the rights of the homeless, and served the Berkeley and Oakland community for a number of years, not just in the courtroom, but on the Oakland school board, on the Oakland Housing Authority.

And his last appearance, I just want to note, was two weeks before his death when he attended a no Kings rally in Oakland, one of the countless rallies throughout the country that brought millions of people in opposition of authoritarianism. And I feel that his last appearance was a reflection of his deep commitment to economic and social justice.

This lifetime of contributions as somebody who was fearless, as speaking out against those who wielded too much power and a champion for those without a voice. So we have lost a true giant in the East Bay community. And I hope we can all learn from Dan Siegel's example and be inspired by his tireless work ethic and humility.

We know that his legacy, his legacy of justice will guide us to a better tomorrow. I respectfully ask the Senate adjourn his memory today.

Senator, Dan's name will forever be memorialized in our Senate journal. Thank you, Senator Limon.

Thank you, Members. Today I rise to adjourn in the memory of Jaime Alanis Garcia. Jaime was a proud farm worker in Camarillo, California. He was from Mexico and he dedicated 30 years of his life working in our agricultural fields here in the State of California.

He is described as someone who is full of joy, a very hard worker and a giving person. Jaime worked for 10 years on the Central coast picking tomatoes and other crops to provide and support for his wife and daughter who live in Mexico. On July 10th, there were Ayes raids in Camarillo.

Jaime climbed onto a greenhouse roof where he called his family in fear. He called his family to explain that he didn't know what was going to happen, but he wanted to let them know that Ayes had come on to the farm he was working on.

It wasn't until later in the afternoon that his family was notified by the hospital that Jaime had fallen 30ft and sustained life ending injury. Jaime's family was forced to face the reality of his death without ever getting a chance to properly say goodbye, to tell him how much they loved him.

Jaime's last call to his family was to tell them how scared he was. He never knew in that moment that that's the last thing or only thing he would get to say to them for the rest of their lives.

And after 30 years of working in this country as a farm worker, doing the job that our government, our country, our constituents, has called an essential worker job, that his life would end that day that way. Because of where he was working, Jaime had no criminal record.

He was who our country and our state depended on to provide food on all of our tables. And his last moments on Earth were filled with terror. Jaime is the first life and the first loss that we've seen by these immigration raids that are happening in our state.

Jaime is expected to be taken to his hometown of Juanjumbaro, Michoacan, where his wife, daughter and family await him. Jaime's life was dedicated to our lands, our crops, and to providing for his family. It's a story and a history that many of us in this chamber personally understand.

It's also a story and a history that 882,000 farm workers in California and 2.6 million farm workers in this country understand. Members, I ask that we adjourn today in Jaime's memory.

Senator, May Jaime's death not have been in vain, and his memory will forever be engraved in our journal. If there's no other business. Mr. Pro Tem, the desk is clear.

Thank you so much, Madam President. I want to say thank you so much to the Senator from Santa Barbara and the Senator from Berkeley for advancing those adjourning memories.

I want to end it here as we are about to adjourn and head out for our summer work period and just center ourselves on what a privilege it is to be able to do the job we do each and every day. And while we may have disagreements, we may have an occasional spicy debate.

One thing is for sure, no matter your party affiliation, we're here to put the people of California first. And this body has worked incredibly hard getting to this date, working on passing a budget that protects the most vulnerable, invests in the institutions and the people that make this state great.

And we have passed hundreds of bills through committees and on the Senate Floor that will improve the lives of millions of Californians for generations to come.

We truly hope that you get some well deserved downtime over the next few weeks with family, reconnect with friends, and to know that most of us are going to be incredibly busy doing the good work that we love to do in the communities that we love.

Really grateful for that work that you do in the communities that you so proudly represent. A brief preview as we come back for the final four weeks of this year's legislative session. We will have some additional work on the budget, which I know the Vice Chair will be excited to be able to advance.

As the Vice Chair looks the other way, I say it with love. As the Vice Chair, we are going to have work to do on affordability. We are going to have work to do on ensuring that we are protecting the most vulnerable when it comes to immigration as well. And of course, on energy reliability.

Madam President, I'm going to end these short remarks from an age old philosopher, a philosopher from the band Semisonic. You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here. The next floor session is scheduled for Monday, August 18, 2025 at 2:00pm thank you, Mr. President.

Senate is in recess until 3:30pm at which time the adjournment motion will be made. We will reconvene August 18, 2025 at 2pm Have a phenomenal summer recess.