Businessman and son of Iranian refugees Jon Elist has launched his campaign for United States Senate in California. Elist is challenging incumbent Senator Alex Padilla, who was appointed to his position by Governor Gavin Newsom in 2021.
Unlike Padilla, who has been a career politician for nearly twenty-five years and has not had a private sector job since the 1990s, Elist is an outsider, entrepreneur, and successful businessman who brings a fresh perspective that is desperately needed in California and Washington D.C.
Calvary Audio, ladies and gentlemen. I'm at Bolinsky in this is the prevailing narrative. So a wise man once said men of action are favored by the Goddess of luck. Um today with a man who hopefully as the Goddess of luck on his side, as he is a man of action, gentleman named John Elist. So I'd spoken with John around the holidays, and and he and I found each other to be like minds about a number of things going wrong with the state of California and Los Angeles. And he mentioned casually the potential of a run for a California Senate in California. UM. And this seems something fairly far fetched because he had no career in politics and whatnot. But I certainly don't write off anyone, particularly anyone who seemed as competent as John was. And he went ahead and ran. He's someone who looked around at his surroundings and circumstances, didn't like what he saw, and instead of just bitching about it, he went and did something about it and is running for Senate in California, ring to unseat California State Senator Alex Padilla. John is here with us today, John, thanks so much for joining us. Thanks so much for having me, Matt my pleasure. So listen, we're gonna go in so many details about what's been going on going wrong with the state of California, but it can all be kind of encapsulated by the fact that only two years on record has there been net outflow migration away from the state of California, meaning more people leaving than people coming. Those two years were the last two years. Okay, if anything doesn't signal that something is rotten in Denmark, that that certainly does. So, John, Um, as you before, when what animated your decision to take this action, tell us a little bit about what you saw, how it made you feel, what your reaction was, and what your observations that led to this decision. You got it right. I grew up in California, just like you, and the California of today is pretty much unrecognizable from what we saw growing up. And you know, my parents came from Iran. I'm the son of immigrants, and a lot of the reason that immigrants into the U at to California in particular, was because California is always seen as the land of opportunity. Um and that unfortunately is no longer the case. When we have rising inflation, gas prices, homelessness, crime, terrible educational outcomes. These are all the direct results of one party rule that we've essentially had for a generation in California. And so the argument I've made to people is it doesn't really matter what your party preferences. Anytime you have consolidation of political power in one party, there you lack transparency, you lack accountability, and that doesn't serve any voters nobody to keep them honest. That's right, that's right. Um, So in love to dig a little bit deeper into the actual decision to run, because this is something that is very unique, thinking about how many people once again look around at their surroundings. They they yeah, lament the bums that are in office, want to throw them out, but they don't go ahead and actually decide to run for a statewide office in the largest state in the country. Um thinking, give us a give us a little bit of insight into the mechanics of investigating this decision and making this decision yourself, and how what your approach was. Yeah, so I was looking for different opportunities where we could really go after the one party rule and give voters a viable option. And when I looked at this Senate race in particular, I saw that there was no major candidate that was challenging the appointed incumbent, Alex Fadia. And you know, the prevailing wisdom, if you will, is that Alex Padilla is someone who's very connected to California politics, has governmental experience, and because he's Latino, um taps into a large portion of the population. And so people say, well, you know, it's it's impossible to be someone of his profile. And honestly, I called bs. I think somebody that has twenty five years of working in California politics as a career politician. That's a huge liability this cycle because of all the things we talked about before. And so then when I looked at the list of challengers, I saw that no one was really treating in this race. Seriously. You would think that a congressman, a mayor, you know, someone would be running in opposition because a Senate seat is is is a pretty big deal. Um those states you'll see, like in Pennsylvania last night with the primary, that was a contested election on both sides of the aisle. But we don't really have that in California, and that's a travesty for for voters. And so that was that was the logic. Uh. Once I saw that opportunity and saw that no major candidate was entering the race, that's when I started reaching out to various contacts and networks to say, all right, who are some of the experienced folks that can work with me to really build a campaign in a relatively short amount of time to get the word out there, the messaging out there. So there's an entire industry here. No matter how much of let's call it a populous grassroots campaign, you have to employ these people. And I think people don't understand how how this works. Maybe if you could give us a little bit of the plumbing here on if somebody wants to run for office, who are who are the players? How do they have to go about this? And what does that say about the system that they are that these are people who make their livelihood on this right, so that they're crossing over from one side to the other. They are working on campaigns that seemingly contradictory purposes, and I think that colors a lot of our political economy. I think people don't really understand. No, that's that's exactly right. There is an entire industry and I wasn't familiar with it until I dove into it. It all starts with the campaign manager of the campaign strategist that you're working with. They essentially become kind of like a general contractor if you're going on a construction project, and then there are a whole set of subcontractors that end up working with that general contractor. I was very fortunate to find someone that sort of thinks outside of the boxing, was willing to take the chance on a first time candidate running for such an ambitious office. He saw the vision and as soon as that happened, it was it was like a marriage made in heaven. Um. But a lot of times candidates who are not the most sophisticated when it comes to business decisions and whatnot, UM really get taken kind of uh they're to it. So I've seen, for example, pitches where they'll pay twenty five thirty thirty five cents text message to be sent out to voters. And if anyone who has done digital marketing before has worked in the business, you realize that it really should be a fraction of that. But unfortunately, because of the dynamics and the way it works in politics and some of the requirements of FBC reporting and whatnot, you end up with a situation where these candidates end up spending more. And that's that is really bad for the entire system, because this is why candidates end of spending so much time fundraising as opposed to spending time with voters, you know, getting up to snuff on all the different policy issues. Um and, and the things that you would expect candidates to do. Uh and and here's not to hate on every political consultants out there. Hey, you're working with some and they seem to be doing a great job for you. But um man, there there is a graveyard littered with cases of advisors and consultants taking politicians for a ride. And I mean their reputation is very much um as that they're looking to prosper and and they treat this as a business, and that does play into the overall costs. If you want to get money out of politics, well, okay, you've got to create a playing field where our candidate doesn't necessarily need to rely on anyone who's trying rely on a vendor. These are vendors. These are people who are running businesses, consultants, and that that certainly plays into it. And you would think that with the advent of social media, digital marketing that things should get cheaper. It's actually more effective to get your messaging out there because you have all these different platforms that didn't exist years ago. But if anything's just gotten more expensive because I think there are consultants out there that kind of prey upon the confusion, uh and sort of add all these bells and whistles and all these extra costs. But yeah, at the end of the day, it's once, yea, once they sent set the market rates and their expectations for Okay, this is how much I should earn based on this level of a camp and pain. It's hard to undercut that and there's not much downward pressure on that um. But it must be a fascinating experience and once again getting to see under the hood and understand why campaigns are run how they are and why politicians make the decisions that they do. It's not always informed by necessarily what you might think, both for good and for bad. It's not necessarily informed by their most sincere, genuine and altruistic instincts. And it's also not this wide ranging and conspiracy where they're colluding with these other sinister powers, malicious powers behind closed doors. Sometimes no, it's just what was most reflected of some consultant who might be beholden to one of their buddies at another consultancy or some think tank, and they told them to do X, Y or Z, and and it really I think it would be interesting and illuminating for people to understand that that's what's going on behind closed doors. So let's get into some of the specifics about you know, your candidacy and your view on things going on in California, because these are issues that really run down, run down the chain, right of all the uh, all the political decisions and elections that we're facing here in California and Los Angeles. So obviously crime and homelessness on everybody's mind very much the forefront, certainly for candidates that are leaning either Republican, leaning more to the right um and even you're finding in a lot of these races Democrats where where a Democrat first Democrat race where this is still the playing field, These are still the key, the key issues regardless of who's running, right, um so um crime. You know you and I have connected on the Gascon recall, certainly uh cognizant and a breast of how these decarcerationist, pseudo reformist policies have really done harm to public safety, infrastructure and apparatus here in California. UM tell us about what you know, what your thoughts are to change it, what you can do, just one policy wise, but two messaging wise, because sometimes just about the right voice being the loud voice. And on that last one, that's a really really important point, because a U. S. Senator has a platform, has a voice that can be quite powerful in terms of being able to affect change, even if it's not relatively directly in the Senate. And so, for one, I think California could really use a senator that's willing to go out there and say that CHESSI budin up in San Francisco and George Jascon should be recalled. Unfortunately, right now we've got an appointed senator that is completely silent on those issues just because it probably makes HI feel uncomfortable within the democratic establishment to go against some of these progressive d A s. And and that's it, that's it, right, and that there there's a machine, a guy like Alex Padilla, he was Secretary of State before he was in Secretary of States. A bit of a rubber stamp, you know. Pretty much the most prominent function of the Secretary of State in the state like California is that his name is on all the documents when someone files for a company and else of corporation whatnot. That's right. I saw first encountered Alex Pidia's name. But he's clearly part of a system. And once you're part of a system, you don't want to go against the system, right and if the system pops out of George Gascon or at chess A Buddin or Gavin Newsom even um, you're very much gonna be hesitant no matter what the problems are, to to label them the because of them. Um. So has he how has he commented on the crime issue at all? I mean, has he engaged any Well, that's your observation that there were no other candidates, right to what extent has he engaged on this issue? Yes? So, I think that one of the one of the fascinating aspects is anytime there's an issue that presents itself, whether it's crime or homelessness. The knee jerk reaction is just to say, oh, well, we need more funding to be able to solve it. And I don't think that that's the answer, right. I mean, we can throw double triple the amount of money that we're throwing into homelessness, and we're throwing a ton of resources for the federal city, county, city level, and we've seen in California that it's only gotten worse. I mean, we now have a nearly hundred billion dollar surplus in the state. So I've always argued that this isn't a resources problem, it's a leadership problem. We've just had completely misguided policy that has been ruining the state and you know at the county level as well. And before we get to your your solutions and the leadership issue that you just mentioned, I think we people need to understand how much money we've spent on this stuff, right, that it can't be a money issue, because we're spending more than anybody mental health, substance abuse, homelessness. I mean, we've been throwing money at it for so long. If money was going to solve it, it seems like money would have solved it. That's exactly right, And you're seeing the level of waste that's happening. For example, on the homelessness issue, where the l Controller came out saying that the cost of building an affordable housing unit is about eighty thousand dollars a unit. I want you to repeat that. Eight hundred and thirty thousand dollars a unit. I mean that's on par with to build affordable housing unit. Yeah, go buy him an eyed condo. Oh. So we know that the money is not being spent well, but even on the programs that they're spending it on, it's just not working because we're not getting the results that we all expect. Um. So yeah, on the crime issue, I think fundamentally one of the big things. And I know, Matt you called this out early on the passage of Proposition forty seven back in two thousand four. Team, there's a direct line between the crime they were experiencing now and what happened back by George Gascon. As soon as we removed the accountability in our criminal justice system, this is where kind of uh, you know, it was, it was impossible for us to put the genie back in the bottle. What we need to do at this point is make sure that criminals are held to account um and if the d as at the county level won't do it. One of the amazing parts of the federal government is that the U. S. Attorney's Office is able to step in and prosecute those criminals. And we've seen it happen before. We have that happened a couple of times. Maybe you could tell us a little bit about how that works. So both the U. S. Attorney's Office and the attorneys that work for the Attorney General of the State of California have the ability to super see need the county prosecutors and take over a case. And it doesn't happen all that often because you assume that if a county d A is doing their job, that they're prosecuting criminals in line with long health standards and held the account Unfortunately, as we've seen, that hasn't been happening at the county level, and so on a couple pretty egregious cases, the U. S. Attorney's Office is stepped in and so that's an area where a senator at the federal level can work with the Department of Justice to ensure that that's happening more often. I mean, I hope that after two will have an attorney general in California that's going to be doing that at the state level. But if not, then at the very least, the federal government should be stepping in. And so the a senator can assume use the bully pulpit to persuade um the state attorney general or as someone at the federal level. It's not you cannot directly instruct anyone to take on a case. But if if the federal representatives are in lockstep, that the likelihood of it happening is a lot higher, would that be correct? That's right, And we can ensure that the resources are directed to the Department of Justice, for example, to make sure that these prosecutors have the resources they need to pursue those cases. Okay, So on Prop okay, Prop forty seven, that is a state Assembly issue, correct, I mean unless we put it back up for referendum and how the people vote on it again, I mean, the State Assembly has to vote on it and has voted on it. Kevin Kylie, who's another person that I've supported quite a bit. He's put that, you know, the reversal of Prop. Forty seven up for vote. A number of times. The state legislature just doesn't seem to think it's a problem that we've legalized theft under nine hundred and fifty dollars. Um, how do you you know? What path do you see two reversing prop forty seven? Right? I mean imagine yes, if you if you were victorious, um, you would be loud and proud about reversing it. I mean to what extent and looking at the State Assembly and now it's makeup where it's likely makeup next year? Is there any chance that these people find religion on this and understand that this is something but that is ill conceived and it is having inevitable results. So I think the proposition forty seven is sort of um, it's a symptom of a larger problem. And the problem that we're experiencing is the lack of a viable opposition in this state. Right Kevin Kyle is out there fighting the good fight. Kevin Kylie would be a lot more effective if he had like minded Assembly members and senators in Sacramento working with him, And unfortunately that's not the case because right now the Republicans have super minorities over there. Uh. Her voice has been very very much diminished. The issue with the status quo right now is that unless they feel genuine pressure to change things, it's never gonna happen. And so I think, you know, part of the part of the rationale for my campaign is to start to build up the loyal opposition, if you will, in the state of California. Right now, the Republicans, unfortunately have not been putting up candidates that can speak to and resonate with the majority of voters in the state of California. Obviously, because Republicans have held statewide office in this state in pretty much a generation. So something is going wrong when you don't have the ability for the opposing party to have any levers of power whatsoever. But I also, I mean part of it is also the Republicans because they've had such a massive messaging problem. You talk to most people and you say, you know, do you agree with the outcomes of proposition? Do you agree that we got what we needed from the higher taxes we've been paying with regards to the homelessness issue? You know, these are all just the overall question of do you think California has been heading in the right direction? Six prethentic Californias are saying no, so again and again on these various issues. People are signing with the opposition. They just don't know it and they can't get past the mental leap of saying vote for someone else. Absolutely, the Republicans have to take responsibility, you know, as a trailing liability. During their messaging during the two thousands, in the early two thousand tents, and they were really putting up that they were putting up candidates. They were more focused on nationally oriented nonsense and and you know, team loyalty and tribal antics then the hard and fast material reality of governing in the state of California. And they've they've paid the price, and we've paid the price for that. I think I always go back to Carly Fiorina's she was wondering running for governor, right or was it senate? You know, yeah, yeah, And I just she kept on spouting off all she was approaching this like she was Mitch McConnell's like, sorry, Carley, you don't live in Kentucky. Like this messaging, these bromides that you keep on, you know, and these these these bromides and these platitudes as you keep on rolling out like great, you know, they're gonna get you some claps on the back from god knows who in Kentucky. They don't, they don't mean anything to anybody here, and I think a lot of Um. The reason that we have such one sided politically political economy here in California is because the Republicans just tried to appeal to national interests instead of local ones. And I think they've uh, they have a real opportunity in once again. That seems to be the mistake that the Democrats are making, particularly guy named Gavin Newsom, who will get to in a second, by focusing on issues of national interests as opposed to local interest Um. But you know, refocusing locally because maybe it was maybe it was at a a function of things being too good. When things were too good, everybody uh kind of got lost in the shuffle of meaningless you know, uh, issues of low relevance. But now that people are concerned about the quality of life here, it's local, local, local. Um, so going to uh to that point, you know, Gavin Newsom, Um, Gavin Newsom, having survived a recall in stunning fashion last year, UH is running one, you know, running once again. Pretty it seems to have his race sewn up, but there is an outside candidate who was coming in and causing a bit of a stir, guy named Mike Shellenberger. You know, I don't want to get too deep into the weeds of the governor's race, but you know what's your perspective here on an independent who does seem to come from a more liberal foundation causing a stir and starting to bring together an interesting coalition of people, um, who have never really voted together in California. You know, people are concerned about the homeless problem, but might look towards some more traditionally progressive solutions, um nuclear energy advocates. But then you know people who are also very socially liberal, And you know what, what have your observation has been about another upstart candidate taking on an entrenched power here from the California political system. Yeah, look, it's a great question, and it actually speaks to some of the stuff we were talking about before in terms of, you know, going under the hood and understanding the motivations of candidates, because one of the first decisions that you as a candidate have to make is are you going to side with a party or not? And if you're with the party, which party are you gonna go with? UM? And so obviously Mike Schellenberger has made the decision to go independent or no party preference as they call it here UM. Whereas you know, you obviously have other Democrats and Republicans that are running as well. The the issue right now, you know, the prevailing wisdom right now when it comes to no party preference is that it's very, very difficult to make it one past the primaries, but to pass the general as well. And a couple of case studies the people point to. In two thousand fourteen, Dan Schner, who's a professor out of USC very well respected guy UM ran for Secretary of State against ultimately Alex Padilla, and unfortunately he couldn't make it past the primary when he ran as a no party preference candidate, despite the fact that he probably had some of the best ideas going into the race. Similar situation in two thousand eighteen, Steve Poisoner, who was previously insurance commissioner and was a Republican, decided to run as a no party preference candidate UM, and he had a ton of resources. He's he's personally very very wealthy and could put a ton of resources behind it and still couldn't win in the general. And so I think one of the major questions that voters have to ask themselves is do you think that a no party preference candidate is going to make it through? Because that's going to color their decisions on the rest of the ballot as well. You definitely have some new party preference folks up and down. You know, I've been an independent politically for most of my life. Yeah, I was gonna ask what what informed your decision? Because you are certainly, you know, if you're if we're looking at the co heart of just Republicans far more liberal and moderate and definitely towards the most liberal deviation of the Republicans. So what informed your decision to run, you know, affiliated with the party as opposed to independently. Yeah, yeah, I mean, honestly, I'd say it's it's it's less liberal or moderate. It's just really common sense that I tried to comment at it with. But you know, the issue was exactly what I laid out. It's it's very difficult to get out of the primaries without a ton of resources and a ton of name I d if you're running is intended voters just tend to gravitate towards seeing that d or that are next to someone's name, because if you don't have the opportunity, through just a ton of resources to get your messaging out, it's very difficult for voters to know, well, where do you stand on because where are your priorities? Now my campaign certainly has a nuanced message to it, and you know, I think that nuance will hopefully come into much more play as we get into the general for sure. Um. But that was a lot of the rationale for why people really do just react to the signal. They react to the signal of seeing a party affiliation that's that's right. And so that's what that's my fear with Schellenberger. I think he has some fantastic ideas. I agree with him on a lot of what composing um, and I certainly think that the system could use, you know, a real jolt, especially coming from an independent side. Um. We just haven't seen it work historically. Now Schellenberger may prove it wrong because he's got quite a bit of Twitter following. I know he was on Joe Rogan, even Tucker Carlson was saying program that I'd vote for you. Um So that's amazing momentum. And I'm rooting for him to prove us wrong terms independent making it through, Yeah, yeah he does. His independent candidacy does feel a little different because he has pre existing name recognition and because he seems to be so aggressively courting and it there seems to be, like I said, this unique, uniquely diverse set of people who are receptive to him, right, and truly like it seems to be the what the blueprint would be for an independent candidate, because that's the whole idea that all these people who aren't finding what they're satisfied with otherwise go to, uh, find an alternative lane, right, and he really seems to be seems to be occupying that alternative lane fully. Um So, uh no doubt, no doubt. And want to see what I want to see, you know, where his candidate he takes him, um a little more tangibly and we'll have more of the prevailing narrative after the break. So the number one issue on your website under under campaign issues is the economy and inflation your business person, yourself, very successful medical device company. Um. Inflation really is on everybody's mind, and if it's not, it's going to be as it's probably affecting their lives in ways that they haven't really realized yet. So this is something as a senator that you would be you know, directly involved in and in solving um and inflation is a bit of an opaque issue. It's a little a little difficult for people to understand, I mean, other than the kind of linear cause and effect of the government printing money, but that's not the entirety of the situation. Maybe you can tell us a little bit about your views on inflation, what the causes have been, what the outlook is, and what the potential solutions are. Yeah. Absolutely so, like you said, inflation is sort of multifaceted. There's monetary policy that comes from the Federal Reserve that that informs it, of course, but Congress also has a role in terms of the fiscal stimulation that they can provide to the economy. And I think that economists, including some economists that worked with under the Obama administration, have come to the realization that the over stimulus of the economy that we did last year, the one point nine trillion dollar fiscal bomb, if you will, that Congress passed. There's a direct relationship between the passive of that legislation and the almost eight and a half percent inflation that we're experiencing today. Uh. And so one of the major things that I would do in Congress is very much be of the mindset that any sort of fiscal stimulus has to be treated very, very skeptically. I mean, obviously, if things change fundamentally in the way that the economy is, you know, you have to be open to potentially, you know, using that tool. But right now and even back then, you know, I would have made the argument that there are plenty of opportunities from an employment standpoint to be able to get back into the economy, and the economy was starting to pick up on its own, it didn't need that additional stimulus, right. That's what it really irks me about this whole situation. It seemed like such a perfect, incredibly performative and that Joe Biden and the Biden administration just wanted to look like they were And I've talked about this a lot within the context of COVID, the disease of something. They wanted to look like they were doing something right. And obviously, if they could engage in, you know, a giveaway to a number of political allies and patrons. Then all to the better. But the notion is that the government is that the American economy needed this huge stimulus because we're under pandemic conditions. However, we had been under pandemic conditions for about fifteen sixteen months at that time. The economy had recalibrated to UH to accommodate those pandemic conditions, so we didn't need more stimulus. People were still buying, people were still transacting, and so they they imposed a solution with that had no problem. The problem was already solved. It was just and I'd like to believe it was more than just you know, payola to try to get lower income voters to vote for them because they were given more money than the Republicans. But I mean, I'm not apt to give them the benefit of the doubt at this point. I mean, is that how you saw And speaking of Paola, there's another sort of payola situation that's happening in California, or it is kind of in the process happening. You know, with this massive inflation, we've seen gas prices go through the roof. There was just recording today that said that nationally there's no state that has gased less than four dollars a gallon, which I mean in California, we'd be we'd be so excited to have four dollars a gallon. We're seeing six and seven dollars a gallon. But a lot of the reason that we've been having these obscene gas prices. Obviously there are macro factors in terms of energy independence and foreign policy that play into it, but there's also a level of taxation that goes into it a lot of people don't know about. In the state of California, every gallon, fifty one cents of it goes to the State of California. Over eighteen cents of it goes to the federal government. At fifty one cents is about to go up on down there. There's an automatic six pers send increase, and the state legislature didn't do anything about it to stop it. Now Gavin Newsom has put in a proposal to say, hey, we're gonna give everyone a four rebate. Um. The problem with that is multiple so one. Anytime we've had the State of California doling out money, we've seen major, major problems. Just look at what happened with the E. D. D. Frock God, what a disaster. So that's one big issue. But the other big issue, and this is what plays into the payoll point you were making. They've timed those rebate checks to come out September or October of this year, and guess what happens on November eight, the election. It's unbelievable. It's so craven and so blatant, and it's like, it's so condescending. Yeah, that's exactly right. The easiest way to do it would be to just suspend the gas tacts for a certain period of time. Right then, it's just it's targeted to the right people. It's anybody that is using gas now getting some relief from the government. But instead they create this complicated scheme of a rebate program timed around the election. It's just it boggles the mind. It is boggles the mind too, that they believe they can get away with this level of condescending corruption, that they can be this obvious they're buying people's votes, and that they'll get away with it and prosper from it. But maybe they will. Yeah, so, our buddy Kevin Kylie As we mentioned before, he has been uh floated out a number of proposals to to uh suspend the gas tax. They've all been unsuccessful so far. But today uh he tweeted out that he started starting to see a lot of Democratic legislators UM also get on board with suspension of the gas tax. Is there any chance that this happens? Yeah, it's possible, and Kevin Kylie is definitely fighting the good fight over there. I hope that the pressure is starting to mount on some of the Democrat members over there in the legislature, So it's it's certainly possible. But I honestly I wouldn't hold of my breath um, only because the establishment right now, I think its started to coal leesce around that rebate program for the obvious reason that it may help them with the election. God just in no regard for what's best for the state whatsoever. Just a pure giveaway. What what does the gas ta? Okay, this is the question that so many people always come back for. We were always paying the most in California. Where does the money go? Where is the money from the gas tax supposed to go? What were we what do they promise us that we're getting for this that we're not getting in Why aren't we getting it? Yeah, so it's it's primarily devoted to infrastructure development in the state. UM and the problem with the way that the state is using the funds. It is really a problem that we see time and again across the various issues. The government has a very tough time building anything these days. I mean, just look at the high speed rail project that was supposed to be way more completed at this point. Any time the government gets involved in the process of any sort of development, whether it's infrastructure or housing, whatever it is, uh, we've typically seen that they've gone over budget and it's taken them way longer to do it. And I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that they're beholden to a lot of different special interests as they go into the process of developing. And so if you talk to any private contractors that end up working with the government, they'll tell you the level of red tape, the level of requirements that the government puts on them in terms of what sort of union labor they have to work with, what sort of you know, wage requirements and conversation requirements and benefit requirements, and there has to be proportioned cost structures. It really is the cost structure. There's a cost structure for everything that goes through the pipes of California government that just soaks up so much tax is so much tax revenue. That's exactly right, That's exactly yeah. UM. To a similar point, Gavin Newsom announces a big budget plus. UM. I think he's gonna be gloating about this despite the fact that budget surplus has nothing to do with him. It has to do with private businesses having very successful years in two thousand, twenty and twenty one. He's continued to bump up the budget um to to mimic and to mirror increase in tax revenue once again from the success and the prosperity of private business in California, which has done very well over the last ten years. UM. Your reaction to, you know, his announcement of the surplus. I believe the budget has now is most recently released budget is three times what it was a decade ago. UM. Your thoughts as a perspective state you know, uh state representative on the California budgetary situation. This surplus is it fool's gold? Um? Can it be done? Too, can it be utilized to solve any of our problems, um, both theoretically or in theory perhaps, but not in practice, because the people that are controlling the purse strings how no interest in actually solving this problem, right right, right right. So my reaction when I saw it was, Look, we have such a level of taxation in this state that it's no wonder that, like you said at the top, we've seen a net negative migration out of the state, and incredibly enough, it's lower middle income earners that are leaving the state in droves, well as small medium sized businesses. So these are the very people and businesses that the status quo right now in California says that they're trying to protect right and rather protecting them, these guys are voting with their feet and leaving the state as quickly as they can. And so my solution, or you know what I would propose to the folks in California and the California legislature would be to use that surplus to lower taxation and to actually make our state attractive to folks. Yet again, I think we forget and we take, we sort of, you know, take advantage of the businesses and people that are in the state and just assumed that they won't go anywhere, and the pandemic has proven otherwise. People are more than willing to leave and go to Texas in Florida, and so we need to be able to compete with some of these other states. And right now we've made it as unattractive as possible from a taxation. And they'll point to the surplus as some proof that that's not the case, right, that this somehow proves, but it's actually proves exactly. What the point is is that if you have a surplus, if you're generating this level of tax revenue, like you return the money to the people, you don't need taxes as high. The whole idea is that taxes tax rates are this high because you need them in order to pay for the things that you need to pay for. You don't just keep on increasing budget just in in uh, in response to an increase in revenue. Yet it never occurs to them to reduce taxes at no point, right right, right right. And the other thing is, you know, part of the surplus was also because of federal spending on the pandemic. Then I think when unused, so when you're looking at the surplus, it's actually not even a old surplus. Uh. You may have just gotten a pop for this year. Um, But between that and the overtaxation, I agree with you that this is really an opportunity for us to give the funds back to the people and to restructure things from a taxation perspective to make it more attractive to stay and come to California. M No doubt, no doubt. Um, So your race, Alex Padia, once again, I mean, I don't see anything notable about this guy. I mean, he seems like the most bland creature of the California Democratic Party system imaginable. He's not even you know, necessarily super progressive, but he but that would require him coming up with some sort of noteworthy idea in the first place, even if it was a bad idea. Doesn't seem to come up with anything. What is this guy doing at you know, not saying how did he become a seditor? Has he done anything? Is he authored any legislation? UM? Would love to hear a little bit more off, were to look at a head to head battle between you and Alex Padilla, what that looks like and how you would approach that yeah, so I agree with you of percent. I mean, there's no real major achievement, not just during his short time in the Senate, but also in his nearly twenty five year career in California politics. Um, when he was in the state legislature. I think one of his major achievements was adding calorie counts. Uh, you know, fantastic. Great. Even when the l A Times was doing this fluff piece on Alex Padilla and you know, talking about how he's the first Latino senator and my gosh, isn't that so fantastic whatever, the major thing that they were talking about in terms of an accomplishment, and I kid you not, was the fact that he brought tapatillo into the Senate cafeteria um and added that to the menu. I mean, it's so hollow identity based symbolism. Great, yeah, like we don't have enough of that. That's that's it. That's exactly right. That's exactly right. And so, uh, the results sort of speak for themselves. But you know, he's he's unfortunately, he's a convenient tool of Gavin Newsom. Uh. Padilla has been supportive of Gavin Newsom from even before he was a Lieutenant governor in the state. Um. And so you know, it's not about competence, it's not about you know, new fresh ideas. It's really all about party loyalty and you know, who can scratch each other's back. And that's exactly how Alex Vidia got this. And so his whole mandate has been silent. Let's not rock the boat, let's not do anything, you know, all the while our state has been going to hell in a handbasket, um, between all the inflation, crime, homelessness, all this terrible stuff that's been going on. And so how's the race shaping up? So right now, the main objective is to get to that second spot coming out of the primary. Uh. And so one of the things that that people may not realize is that the primaries in California are structured in such a way where all the parties are now on the same ballot and it's the top two vote getters that end up going off to the general election. So it could be two Democrats, it could theoretically be two Republicans, although that's not going to happen in a state like California. Yeah. Um, But it's it's regardless of party relation, which is why for the past two Senate races in California, it was Democrat versus Democrat. So Einstein ran twenty eighteen. She ran against Kevin de Leone, UH, fellow Democrat, and Kamala Harris ran against Loretta Sanchez, was a Democratic congressman. So I think what we're looking at is the possibility of the first Democrat versus Republican race for California senency UM in about ten years, and that I think is a good thing for the system again because now you have kind of viable alternatives the parties. But in essence, you know, I came into it because I saw the list of challengers and none of them looked particularly compelling or viable in the general election. Uh. And that's why I was very fortunate enough to outraise all of them this past order, which is huge as a first time candidate. And it's absolutely you did that pretty quickly, right. I formally took a race in Februar, and by the middle of April we were announcing that we had outraised the challenges the past order UM. And you know, when you look at it, we've got one person who just run cycle after cycle and unfortunately doesn't get anywhere we have another one who Um, you know, basically, they just haven't raised the resources to be able to get to a good place. And unfortunately, that's what's required to be a viable contender, especially against a massive democratic machine where you have millions and millions and millions of dollars being spent, uh, drop of a hat. Yeah, yeah, they're moving on to a couple of the uh you know, if you become a senator, Hey, these are the issues that you're gonna have to attack. I mean, uh, it seems like the United States is currently fighting somewhat of a proxy war against Russia via the Ukraine. Go on. We're funding them quite heavily. Um, We're giving them state of the art weaponry, and they seem to be fighting the good fight, although it's a little difficult to really get a grasp on on. Clearly, Russia has performed less effectively than than people who are expecting or that they had hoped for. Um. Then the question becomes, Okay, are they're still going to be carving out little, you know, pieces, or let's call it substanti substantial pieces of eastern Ukraine? Um, is there any chance that Ukraine could find a result here that would be considered a victory, etcetera, etcetera. UM, how are you know, how are you seeing this issue being played out in Congress right now? It seems like, uh, some that there is a battle between a large contingent of senators who think that, um, hey, we we seem to be in a new war. We shouldn't be in it right now. Although we support you know, we morally support the Ukraine, this is not in America's strategic interests. Um. But most seemed to be beating the drums of war, and you know, it seemed to think that, okay, great, this is a way for us to take on an adversary, UM and weaken an adversary without sacrificing an American troop. UM. Would love your thoughts on the subject. Yeah, for sure. I mean, look, in general, I have been really disappointed with the foreign policy of the current administration. Uh and need look no further than the pull out from Afghanistan or the fact that we're trying to re engage with Iran on a disastrous deal and using Russia as our conduit to the Iranian regime. Like, none of it, none of it makes any sense. In general. I'm of the mind that we have tons of problems going on in the United States as it is, and we already have a ton of debt um and so in general, my my philosophy is that we have to take care of things in America and use taxpayer funding towards that. However, I'm also of the belief that America has a role to play on the world stage. Um And unfortunately, when we don't play that role, we start to see some major conflicts throwing all over. And yes, you know, I understand the argument of not getting involved and kind of letting it play out. But to the extent that we can support outside of being directly involved in the conflict, I think that can a good thing. And I say that as I know that China is watching the situation very closely and they have a whole situation going on with Taiwan as well, um and with Ukraine. I think there is an opportunity for us to support them. But you know, going forward, you know, getting more and more involved, I'd be hesitant to do that, but for now, I think it's it's good for the purposes of what America stands for on the world stage to have somewhat of an outside rule um, and what we're doing. Yeah, it seems to be. It's a bit of my view is it's a risk, right, It's uh, you're you're imagining that there is an off ramp where either you are overthrown Vladimir Putin or you're spooking him so hard that he either Vladimir Putin is toppled or he is spooked by a poor performance and kind of tucks his tail between his legs, goes back rules Russia doesn't cause everybody so much trouble ever again, and this has all been worth it. However, the risk is that either one it does not escalate, or two that you're just throwing money down a sinkhole and that Vladimir Putin is going to accomplish, you know, some version of his original while at a higher cost, he's going to accomplish some version of his initial objectives. Um, he's going to continue to have quite a strangle hold over worldwide resources because you know of Russia's economy and how he's positioned it over the past seven eight years. And you just spouted, you know, forty billion dollars down to Synkhole for no reason. And it's kind of it is further alienated Americans who think that money is better spent here. Um, so it's a risk, it seems to be the risk seems to be turning out. The bet seems to be a turning out well so far. But um, I think we've got to keep we keep in mind that uh uh, the keep in mind that there's no shorge ways for this to go wrong over the coming weeks and months, and we'll have more of the prevailing narrative after the break back to some local issues here and you know, beyond statewide items. Um, you're Los Angeles resident. I've kind of said this is a make or break year for l A. We've got all the elections this year, we've got an attempt to recall that this strict attorney um who was part of a decarcerationist brigade. As we have mentioned, Um, the mayor's race. You know, well, let's everybody knows the mayor's race, right. It is the showdown Mono and Mono Rick Crusover as Karen Bass, the outsider with more kind of traditionally conservative or moderate leaning common sense solutions to crime, homelessness, and taxation versus the creature of the democratic machine. Um. But people don't quite realize that some of the other facets of l A politics are incredibly powerful. The City Council and the Board of Supervisors. UM, these are our boards and and organisms. You know, they control immense amount of budget, right and you know, for instance, the Board of Supervisor also appointed the UH County Public Health Department UH staff, and that was incredibly influential over how the city was run and how our lives were ordered during the pandemic. Um, what have you seen from the you know, in terms of looking at the composition and the actions of the city Council on the Board of Supervisors, you know, what have you seen that you know may have fueled some of your dissatisfaction with what you're seeing in Los Angeles and where you'd like to see those those races go. Yeah, now, and all of those ones that you mentioned, the County Board of Supervisors is arguably the most powerful just from a budget standpoint and what they're able to. If you could elaborate on that, that would be great. Yeah. Absolutely, So the County Board of Supervisors for Los Angeles UM gets the property taxes UH and a few other sources of revenue, and so they have a passive budget. And when it comes to public health, that's there, that's within their purview, UM. But a lot of the work that we're also doing from a homelessness perspective, UH is also under county purview. And right now we've had, in my opinion, a major imbalance. I believe right now it's four to one. There's one Republican county supervisor versus four Democrats, UM, and there's one Democrat who sometimes votes with the one Republican, Janis Hahn, I believe is relative on a curve, has been somewhat governed by common sense, right right, right right, and and that's exactly what we need to be looking for in the candidates that are running. It's that sort of common sense of approach, because I would hope that the county Board of Supervisors, with the massive budget that they have, in the lack of outcomes that we've been able to get in this county, that they start to kind of look very very closely into that budget and say what's working, what's not working, and let's make sure that we've got our priorities on right. UM. From a crime perspective, I would very much look to see as a litmus you know who is supportive of the recall of George Gascon and who isn't. And at the very you know, when they're describing what an ideal district attorney looks like, what does that look like for that ideal parriff look like for them? And granted, both the d A and sheriff are directly elected by the people, right these aren't decisions by the Board of Supervisors. But we've seen right now that if one of those other elected officials isn't quite playing ball with their what they're calling the woke agenda, it ends up being just disastrous for everyone involved. And so we've got to make sure that we're getting common sense folks within the Board of Supervisors. I can't tell you how how critical that is. UM. And same for the mayor's race, and same for the city council. UM. Like you said, the mayor's race is a critical one. We've had, unfortunately, a mayor who has really gotten nothing done and has only made these problems worse. Everything from the potholes and infrastructure issues all the way to the crime and homelessness that we've been experiencing. I mean, we both grew up in the city and it's it's what do you think was the problem with Garcetti? Because he seemed like a reasonable candidate, He was good on the city council. I mean, I have my thoughts. What do you think went wrong with him? So I think the fundamental issue is that when a politician has asked for rations for higher goals, they end up being much more focused on that than on the immediate need to get the job done. What they're doing, what they're trying to ingratiate themselves, not with voters and residents of the city. They're trying to ingratiate themselves with the Democratic Party machine, because then they're saying to themselves, that is what's going to get me to a better place. Um do you see that? For example, with Karen Bass. The only reason Karen Bass, in my mind, I think is running for this mayor's uh see, is because she ended up getting passed over as a vice presidential pick by Biden. And so again this is where you start seeing some of this ridiculous inside baseball party politics working. And they said, well, you know, we couldn't give you the VP spot, but we're gonna give you a mayor of l A. Who are you? You know, Mr? Party boss, Mrs Party boss to be telling the state and the city, you know, who should be getting what position. And so I think that's the problem. And the same thing with Garsetti. Um, you know, and now his ball back is to be ambassador to India, and that's you know, sort of a plumb position that he may not ultimately get. Looks like he's not getting it. Yeah, but it speaks to the fact that when you ingratiate yourself with the party, they try and look out for one another and help one another. But you know, results don't really matter. Yeah, yeah, yeah, So those here's an interesting question. I'm gonna you know, dispense. I'm going to put up my voter guide and telling people who to vote for an all the kind of more granular races here in Los Angeles. But if you're if you don't have a research, if you're just a random citizen out there, how do you advise random citizens to bone up on this stuff, to get educated and make their own informed decisions? Yeah, I mean, look, the biggest thing is just to look at the list of candidates that are running and to spend just a little bit of time going to their website and seeing what their priorities are and the kinds of parties that I would suggest that voters look at are exactly the issues that we've talked about here, right, crime, homeless this cost of living. These are the major issues that we've never really had to deal with in a generation, but now all of a sudden becoming massive issues that want us to deal with. And so for example, with Karen bass Um, you know, when she goes to a debate stage and is asked, you know, on a scale of one to ten, how safe do you feel in Los Angeles? And she says, I feel a tent at a ten. That's a pretty clear sign of an out of touch politician. So that's that's one factor that i'd look at, is what are their priorities in terms of issues, and that you can glean their priorities. You can usually clean their priorities by doing the two minutes to go onto the website seeing some of the literature about them. It's not that difficult. That's exactly within the grasp of every person out there. That's right, that's right. The other thing that I would look at is whether or not they're a sitting city council member or basically are they an incumbent or not see see their prior position. That's right, that's right, because right now I think this is this race is all about bringing fresh, new, viable, thoughtful perspectives just not changed just for change sake, but actually bringing really good new people because clearly this hasn't been working. Now, there are some exceptions here and there to that. There are you know, a couple of incumbents that may have been doing a good job, but on the whole, most of the incumbents have not been doing a good job whatsoever. And so I think, you know, when you see that incumbency, that's that's that should be a little bit of a red flag where you say, you know, what is this person actually been doing while they've been in office? And if not, let's look at the alternatives. Yeah, and are they someone who's willing to acknowledge that there may be a problem or the someone who's going to deflect and divert because acknowledging that there was a problem means acknowledging that they didn't solve it in the first place. Yeah, John, Um, if you could tell us a little bit, you know, just about how people can learn more about you know, one any just kind of more holistic message about your candidacy and how people can learn more aboutcher you get involved in your campaign. Yeah, no, I appreciate that. UM. I mean, like I said before, the reason I got involved in this race was because there really was no viable challenger to someone that's been involved in California politics for twenty five years. And I think my perspective changed a lot when I became a parent. I've got two young daughters, UM, and through the pandemic and through sending them UH into the educational system, I think my wife and I both realized that things are just not working in this state. And so that's the kind of perspective that I hope to bring. A parent, husband, business owner in California UM and someone that has advised governments in the past and when I worked in consulting advising national, federal, state, local governments UM. And I've also served in the Small Business Administration and Department of Commerce. So I come into this with an understanding of when the resources are spent correctly, these are the sorts of outcomes that we can potentially have, UM, which is something that is very very much lacking in our in our status quote. Yeah, but I would love for folks to visit the website. It's ellis for Senate dot com, um and and shoot us a line. The team passes along messages to me all the time. I love answering voters questions, just having conversations. UM And that's the other thing for anyone that's trying to learn more about the different candidates right now is a great opportunity to go to events, reach out to folks if you have questions. You'll be surprised at how responsive candidates and their teams tend to be, because you know, everyone is trying to make sure that voters are aware of who they are. UM. And you know, I hope that for folks that I feel inspired by the message and and uh and and agree with where I stand, or or even if they disagree with me, that they see me as someone who's thoughtful about the issues that brings in a new perspective, that they'll share the message with others. That's the best way to get get it out. I'm sure people have asked each other questions of I'm looking the ballot here, I have no idea what these games are. UM. And that's where we can start to change things is if if the message starts getting spread, no doubt, and that's what I've been trying to encourage people here in California, and that that message that has resonated is about focus and engagement, is that you need to get engaged. I think if people woke up to some unfortunate realities that if you aren't engaged, the compound effects of poor governance over the course of five to ten years start to affect people's lives. You can ignore it, you can ignore it for a few years, but eventually it catches up. But I think a lot of people are seeing it. And you know, I think it's something that you noticed. And once again, while I was very impressed that you decided to act on it and have been very forthright and communicative about it. And UM, just John, you know, very impressed with what you're doing so far and appreciate you joining us today. Best of luck on your candidacy. Um, we'll see how the next month or next few weeks play out before the primary and uh, you know, if you can make that top two, we look forward to to monitoring your candidacy and be talking with you again. I appreciate it. Matt, thanks so much for the chance. So John, thanks once again for joining us. Everybody. This is the Prevailing Narrative. I am at Bolinski once again. You can listen and subscribe to The Prevailing Narrative on the I Heart Radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you're listening right now. Make sure to follow me on my socials at Matt Bolinsky m A T T B I L I N s k Y. The Prevailing Narrative is a Cavalry Audio production and association with I Heart Radio produced by Brandon Morrigan, Executive produced by Danna Bernetti and Kegan Rosenberger. For Cavalary Audio, I'm at Bolinsky