What Kind of President Would Gavin Newsom Make If Elected in 2028?
California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is having a brutal stretch.
Last month, Newsom was forced to respond after Ruby Rippey, a former aide with whom he had an extramarital affair more than two decades ago, publicly offered new details about the relationship.
Newsom and his wife are also facing increased scrutiny over his extensive use of “behested payments” as federal investigations related to the governor’s orbit, including an inquiry involving First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom, continue to attract attention.
Now, Newsom is scrambling after California Democrats bucked his position on a major tax proposal.
California Democrats exposed a deep internal fracture this month when the party’s executive board voted to endorse a punitive one-time 5 percent tax on the state’s roughly 200 billionaires, openly defying both term-limited Newsom and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra.
The decision gave Proposition 40, formally known as the California 2026 Billionaire Tax Act, the California Democratic Party’s official endorsement ahead of the November 3 ballot.
The endorsement cleared the required 60 percent threshold during the party’s general session in San Diego.
The outcome lays bare a widening rift between the party’s elected leadership and its activist base over how aggressively Sacramento should target private wealth.
Newsom has consistently rejected a state-level wealth tax, warning that California would hand a competitive advantage to lower-tax states if it acted alone. Billionaires, he argues, can simply move.
He has instead pushed for federal tax changes targeting billionaires, arguing that a national approach would reduce the incentive to relocate between states.
Becerra staked out similar territory before the party vote, announcing his positions on several November measures.
He backed Proposition 3, which would permanently extend existing high-earner income-tax rates for education funding, but pointedly opposed the billionaire levy.
The party’s executive board rejected the position taken by both men.
That puts the party’s rank-and-file activists in direct conflict with the sitting governor and the Democratic candidate seeking to succeed him.
In a state where Democrats control every major statewide office and both legislative chambers, the split is unusually stark.
Newsom and Becerra are not fighting Republicans; they are fighting their own party’s left wing.
Proposition 40’s chief advocate is Dave Regan, president of SEIU United Healthcare Workers West.
Supporters cast the tax as essential to replace what they say are roughly $100 billion in federal healthcare cuts over five years under the Trump administration.
They project the levy would raise an estimated $100 billion from California’s roughly 200 billionaires.
Outside endorsements have come from Sen. Bernie Sanders, Rep. Ro Khanna, AFSCME California, and Teamsters California.
The California State Council of Laborers opposes the measure.
The California Police Chiefs Association has also come out against it.
Even SEIU California’s statewide executive board—the broader labor organization that includes the affiliate driving the campaign—recently voted to remain neutral.
California already maintains the nation’s highest top marginal individual income tax rate.
Google co-founder Sergey Brin, ranked as the world’s fourth-richest person with an estimated net worth of about $284 billion at the start of this week, has now poured $102 million into efforts aimed at defeating California’s proposed billionaire tax.
His latest contribution of $20 million went to Building a Better California, a group backing ballot measures that could block Proposition 40.
Prop. 40, the so-called billionaire tax set for the November ballot, would impose a one-time 5% levy on the net worth of roughly 200 ultra-wealthy residents of the Golden State.
Critics, however, see it as a classic left-wing wealth grab that punishes success and accelerates the exodus of job creators from an already heavily taxed state.
Yet Newsom’s stance has done little to stop the measure from advancing, and competing ballot initiatives backed by the same anti-tax coalition could neutralize it if voters approve them by larger margins.
One such proposal, Proposition 41, would mandate audits of programs funded by new special taxes and apply new tax revenue to the state spending limit, potentially blocking the wealth tax if both measures pass and Proposition 41 receives more votes.
Brin’s massive spending reflects a broader rebellion among some of California’s tech elite against the state’s escalating tax-and-spend culture.
Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, recently purchased a $170 million mansion on Indian Creek Island near Miami. Venture capitalist Peter Thiel, former Uber CEO Travis Kalanick, and Google co-founder Larry Page have also reportedly relocated out of California in recent years.
Critics argue that these moves underscore how progressive tax policies can drive productive capital and talent to lower-tax states such as Florida and Texas.
Prop. 40 arrives as California faces mounting fiscal pressure.
Democratic leaders have long relied heavily on taxes paid by wealthy residents to support the state budget and expansive social programs, leaving revenue vulnerable when high earners move or their income falls.
Building a Better California’s campaign, heavily fueled by Brin’s contributions, aims to give voters a clear alternative: reject the wealth tax and support measures that demand greater accountability in how new tax dollars are spent.
💥 PRESS DEBUT DISASTER!
Katie Zacharia’s Awkward First White House Press Briefing Draws National Attention
Katie Zacharia’s first appearance behind the White House podium quickly became a major talking point after several uncomfortable moments overshadowed her debut as President Donald Trump’s new press secretary.
The October 13 briefing lasted approximately 14 minutes, with Zacharia answering questions from only three news outlets before ending the session. Her short appearance immediately attracted widespread media attention.
Zacharia had recently been selected to replace former press secretary Karoline Leavitt, stepping into a highly visible role responsible for communicating the administration’s positions to journalists and the American public.
From the opening minutes, observers noticed her reliance on prepared notes. She delivered a lengthy account of Trump’s accomplishments, frequently looking down at the script instead of maintaining eye contact with reporters.
Her delivery also attracted criticism, with commentators describing her voice as hesitant and her presentation as unusually stiff. Others questioned whether the administration had given its newest spokesperson enough preparation time.
Much of the briefing focused on praising Trump’s economic agenda, energy policies, rally attendance, and political achievements. The extended list of talking points left relatively little time for substantive exchanges with journalists.
One particularly awkward moment occurred when Zacharia discussed the challenge of balancing her demanding position with family life. She explained that spending evenings away from her four children was unacceptable to her.
She then accidentally referred to her husband as “my president” before immediately correcting herself with “my husband.” Recognizing the slip, she added a brief joke, creating the briefing’s most widely discussed moment.
The verbal mix-up spread rapidly through news coverage and social media, becoming a defining image of her first appearance. Critics treated it as evidence of nervousness, while others viewed it as an ordinary human mistake.
Her response to a question about U.S. intelligence sharing with Ukraine also drew attention. When asked whether Washington had stopped sharing intelligence with Kyiv, Zacharia replied that she would have to get back to the reporter.
The exchange was brief, but it highlighted the difficulty of responding to sensitive foreign policy questions without immediately having the necessary information. Reporters continued seeking answers as the briefing moved forward.
Another significant announcement concerned Kimberly Guilfoyle, the U.S. ambassador to Greece. Zacharia told reporters that the administration had asked Guilfoyle to resign, unexpectedly introducing a personnel development into the short briefing.
The announcement generated additional headlines and demonstrated that, despite the awkward delivery, Zacharia’s first appearance included consequential political news. Her handling of the announcement, however, also attracted scrutiny from commentators.
Questions about her readiness soon emerged among political observers and some administration allies. The Wall Street Journal described the debut as rocky, reporting that her nervous presentation prompted questions about the decision to put her before cameras so quickly.
The brief question-and-answer session was another unusual feature. After taking questions from Breitbart News, Fox News, and the Daily Mail, Zacharia announced that reporters could ask Trump questions directly as he prepared to leave.
Her decision to end the briefing after such limited questioning became another focus of criticism. Regular White House briefings often involve extended exchanges, making the short session particularly noticeable to journalists and political commentators.
Despite the criticism, Trump publicly defended his new press secretary. Asked about her performance, the president said he thought she had done very well, offering a clear show of support following the difficult debut.
The White House also presented the briefing positively, describing Zacharia’s performance as commanding. That assessment contrasted with critical media coverage, illustrating how differently supporters and detractors interpreted the same appearance.
Zacharia’s debut has therefore become an early test of her ability to manage a demanding communications role. Future briefings will offer a clearer indication of whether she can develop greater confidence and handle sustained questioning.
For now, the accidental “my president” remark remains the most memorable moment from her first appearance. Whether the incident becomes a brief viral embarrassment or a lasting political talking point will depend on what follows.
