Well, coming up next, I have Ezra Kleine here in studio talking about his new book that he co authored with Derek Thompson called Abundance. In this book, Ezra does not hold back on taking a very critical look at democratic governance all across the United States of America, in particular in my home state of California. This is Gavin Newsom and this is Ezra Klein. Ezra is great to have you here in studio.

Well, coming up next, I have Ezra Kleine here in studio talking about his new book that he co authored with Derek Thompson called Abundance. In this book, Ezra does not hold back on taking a very critical look at democratic governance all across the United States of America, in particular in my home state of California. This is Gavin Newsom and this is Ezra Klein. Ezra is great to have you here in studio.

Thanks for having me here for this weird inversion.

Thanks for having me here for this weird inversion.

Weird inversion, and you've been I mean you've been all over the place. You got a new book, Abundance, and we'll jump right into that, but I want to just frame a little bit of the relationship that we have that goes back and you may not even remember this. I was a new mayor in San Francisco and was asked by Bill Mahert to go on a show. I remember that you were one of the panelist, and I'll remember forget just sparring with Bill obviously, and then you And after the show was done and we were all finishing, you had left, maher goes up to me and he goes, who the hell was that? And I'm like, I know who the hell was that, and it was you. We were like whoa, uh, just for both of us didn't have a you know, I was I was relatively new, Bill's been seasoned.

Weird inversion, and you've been I mean you've been all over the place. You got a new book, Abundance, and we'll jump right into that, but I want to just frame a little bit of the relationship that we have that goes back and you may not even remember this. I was a new mayor in San Francisco and was asked by Bill Mahert to go on a show. I remember that you were one of the panelist, and I'll remember forget just sparring with Bill obviously, and then you And after the show was done and we were all finishing, you had left, maher goes up to me and he goes, who the hell was that? And I'm like, I know who the hell was that, and it was you. We were like whoa, uh, just for both of us didn't have a you know, I was I was relatively new, Bill's been seasoned.

You a lieutenant governor then, I don't think you lieutenant.

You a lieutenant governor then, I don't think you lieutenant.

Got wasn't it? You know? It was I still was liet. I'm pretty sure lieutenant governor. So but I was like, anyway, I'd been on the show a bunch of times, but you were. You had a next level capacity to analyze things and to deliver a point of view. And so it's not surprising to me that so much of that, including that conversation we probably had on that studio and said, it's reflected in what you've been focused on.

Got wasn't it? You know? It was I still was liet. I'm pretty sure lieutenant governor. So but I was like, anyway, I'd been on the show a bunch of times, but you were. You had a next level capacity to analyze things and to deliver a point of view. And so it's not surprising to me that so much of that, including that conversation we probably had on that studio and said, it's reflected in what you've been focused on.

I think about your book from that era, Republic two point zero.

I think about your book from that era, Republic two point zero.

It was called right, yeah, Citizenville, Citizenville you had to take the town square digital and reinvent government. How about that?

It was called right, yeah, Citizenville, Citizenville you had to take the town square digital and reinvent government. How about that?

Yeah, it's something we should thread into this conversation. I think people have forgotten that era of Gavinism.

Yeah, it's something we should thread into this conversation. I think people have forgotten that era of Gavinism.

Yeah. Well, I think in so many reflects in aspects I was reading this book and you're reflected in this. I mean, this has been my struggle as a former mayor. You chronicle San Francisco, California disproportionately. But this book is fundamentally about the future, and you framing the future in abundance terms. But it's also a real shot against liberalism in many respects, against the world we created now competing against us in terms of process and courts and laws and rule making and all of that that's created so much of this cost of living dynamics. So tell us what was the inspiration of the book. Tell us a little bit about what abundance is.

Yeah. Well, I think in so many reflects in aspects I was reading this book and you're reflected in this. I mean, this has been my struggle as a former mayor. You chronicle San Francisco, California disproportionately. But this book is fundamentally about the future, and you framing the future in abundance terms. But it's also a real shot against liberalism in many respects, against the world we created now competing against us in terms of process and courts and laws and rule making and all of that that's created so much of this cost of living dynamics. So tell us what was the inspiration of the book. Tell us a little bit about what abundance is.

I mean, the reason the book is so rooted in California that I am. I mean, so this book is co authored with Derk Thompson from the Atlantic, and so we both have our own things you bring to it. But I grew up in Irvine, as you know. I went to the C system that went to d C for twelve or thirteen fourteen years, and I spent a bunch of time in DC covering a political system where the problem was Republicans were bad. Oftentimes the things that I wanted to see happen were not happening there because they were being blocked by the Republican Party. And then in twenty eighteen, I moved back here. I moved back to Oakland and then to San Francisco, and I looked around and it just wasn't doing well. People were unhappy, people were leaving. I mean, I mean, you know this, you're a retail politician, like you can sense people's anger when they find out you have anything to do with politics, they tell you real quick. And we could see the housing crisis hadn't tastasized into something that was genuinely now a crisis. Not just homes are expensive. California high speed rail has always lit me on fire that, yeah, we'll get to that. And when I began to and I was thinking about clean energy where your I mean, the goals that you have set for clean energy in the state are remarkable, and in order to achieve them here or nationally, because the Inflation Reduction Act was passing around this time too, that I was thinking.

I mean, the reason the book is so rooted in California that I am. I mean, so this book is co authored with Derk Thompson from the Atlantic, and so we both have our own things you bring to it. But I grew up in Irvine, as you know. I went to the C system that went to d C for twelve or thirteen fourteen years, and I spent a bunch of time in DC covering a political system where the problem was Republicans were bad. Oftentimes the things that I wanted to see happen were not happening there because they were being blocked by the Republican Party. And then in twenty eighteen, I moved back here. I moved back to Oakland and then to San Francisco, and I looked around and it just wasn't doing well. People were unhappy, people were leaving. I mean, I mean, you know this, you're a retail politician, like you can sense people's anger when they find out you have anything to do with politics, they tell you real quick. And we could see the housing crisis hadn't tastasized into something that was genuinely now a crisis. Not just homes are expensive. California high speed rail has always lit me on fire that, yeah, we'll get to that. And when I began to and I was thinking about clean energy where your I mean, the goals that you have set for clean energy in the state are remarkable, and in order to achieve them here or nationally, because the Inflation Reduction Act was passing around this time too, that I was thinking.

About a lot of this.

About a lot of this.

We have to build faster than we have ever built, and the laws don't really permit that. And so the thing that I began thinking a lot about was that there is something liberalism is good at and knows how to look for, which is where can we subsidize something that people need. But there's something liberalism is bad at because it doesn't know how to look for it, which is how do we create more? How do we make it possible to build more of things people need? And not only are we not good at pursuing that, we don't even realize how often we are getting in the way of it, how often we are the problem. There is I think something bracing as a liberal about asking this question of why, in the places where people who agree with me govern, you and I don't think have that different politics aren't the outcomes what I want to see? Why can't I go say to the Texans or the Floridians, No, no, no, no, you just have to do our policies from California. And that's the thing I'm grappling with here.

We have to build faster than we have ever built, and the laws don't really permit that. And so the thing that I began thinking a lot about was that there is something liberalism is good at and knows how to look for, which is where can we subsidize something that people need. But there's something liberalism is bad at because it doesn't know how to look for it, which is how do we create more? How do we make it possible to build more of things people need? And not only are we not good at pursuing that, we don't even realize how often we are getting in the way of it, how often we are the problem. There is I think something bracing as a liberal about asking this question of why, in the places where people who agree with me govern, you and I don't think have that different politics aren't the outcomes what I want to see? Why can't I go say to the Texans or the Floridians, No, no, no, no, you just have to do our policies from California. And that's the thing I'm grappling with here.

No, And I appreciate that, and we'll get to that question because I think it's a fundamental question, and it's interesting what you sort of define from that prism. That's important because what people are actually looking for isn't necessarily what you are identifying. Specifically, I would challenge, as the problem is that said, what you identify as the problem? I completely agree that. I was going back to my speech, my first speech is governor at the State of California, it might have well, it's these pages. Yeah, literally said if you can build a sports stadium with these new rules and fast tack of judicial process and what we referred to, we'll get the SEQUA are California rules that go back to quite literally Ronald Reagan in nineteen seventy as it relates to environmental review. It should work for homelessness, it should work for housing. And I announced that day an effort to sue up to forty seven cities. We started with one, Huntingdon Beach, California. Doesn't make you popular as governor to announce a lawsuit against Erl City because they weren't meeting their zoning requirements under our housing element. So much of that again reflected in this friction and your own reflected frustration and lived experience in the state of California. But my point is this, as a practitioner, it's a very different reality. But what you identify, I completely embrace these labyrinths of rules, federal rules, state rules. Absolutely localism though, and I want to talk about that localism is determinative and you pick on understandably San Francisco, but you can look at almost any city, including a Republican health city like Huntington Beach, and these same rules and restrictions apply there in the same frustrations. So from the prism of left versus right, you take the shot against liberals. But can't we argue that there is sort of quality of consideration and nimbism that persists in rural and red parts the countries.

No, And I appreciate that, and we'll get to that question because I think it's a fundamental question, and it's interesting what you sort of define from that prism. That's important because what people are actually looking for isn't necessarily what you are identifying. Specifically, I would challenge, as the problem is that said, what you identify as the problem? I completely agree that. I was going back to my speech, my first speech is governor at the State of California, it might have well, it's these pages. Yeah, literally said if you can build a sports stadium with these new rules and fast tack of judicial process and what we referred to, we'll get the SEQUA are California rules that go back to quite literally Ronald Reagan in nineteen seventy as it relates to environmental review. It should work for homelessness, it should work for housing. And I announced that day an effort to sue up to forty seven cities. We started with one, Huntingdon Beach, California. Doesn't make you popular as governor to announce a lawsuit against Erl City because they weren't meeting their zoning requirements under our housing element. So much of that again reflected in this friction and your own reflected frustration and lived experience in the state of California. But my point is this, as a practitioner, it's a very different reality. But what you identify, I completely embrace these labyrinths of rules, federal rules, state rules. Absolutely localism though, and I want to talk about that localism is determinative and you pick on understandably San Francisco, but you can look at almost any city, including a Republican health city like Huntington Beach, and these same rules and restrictions apply there in the same frustrations. So from the prism of left versus right, you take the shot against liberals. But can't we argue that there is sort of quality of consideration and nimbism that persists in rural and red parts the countries.

Well, let me flip this because to shadow box around the fact that you know more about California governance than I ever will in a thousand years ago in this would be ridiculous. Why is it easier to build homes in Texas and California.

Well, let me flip this because to shadow box around the fact that you know more about California governance than I ever will in a thousand years ago in this would be ridiculous. Why is it easier to build homes in Texas and California.

They have Well you established that in the book. In Houston you make the point I think it was seventy thousand permits in twenty twenty three, just seventy five hundred in a much smaller city, San Francisco, but understandable contract a city with more demand, more demand, and it's simply because they have no zoning. They have land use consideration, but Austin has zoning. Yeah, but not Houston. In the context of that.

They have Well you established that in the book. In Houston you make the point I think it was seventy thousand permits in twenty twenty three, just seventy five hundred in a much smaller city, San Francisco, but understandable contract a city with more demand, more demand, and it's simply because they have no zoning. They have land use consideration, but Austin has zoning. Yeah, but not Houston. In the context of that.

The thing I'm getting it here, which I really would like your the thing you just said right about localism. It's so important, and like, this is so much the conversation I'd love for us to have here because the texture that you have been grappling with of why do things that you want to have happen not happen is I think a really interesting thing to add to it. But when you're saying, well, you know, is this really a problem for liberals. It's easier to build in Texas and Florida. They're not just in California, but in California or New York. Right, the cost of living crisis is worse in blue states. And a little bit of that is Blue states are place a lot of people live, but you should be able to in places ent governing for the working class and theory, and your point.

The thing I'm getting it here, which I really would like your the thing you just said right about localism. It's so important, and like, this is so much the conversation I'd love for us to have here because the texture that you have been grappling with of why do things that you want to have happen not happen is I think a really interesting thing to add to it. But when you're saying, well, you know, is this really a problem for liberals. It's easier to build in Texas and Florida. They're not just in California, but in California or New York. Right, the cost of living crisis is worse in blue states. And a little bit of that is Blue states are place a lot of people live, but you should be able to in places ent governing for the working class and theory, and your point.

Is a point and just to level set, people are listening completely agree this notion of the supply demand imbalance. I mean, you're making an econ one to one argument. Uh, And that supply to imbalance is next level in the state of California, Whi're simply not building enough housing and that goes to I mean, and you correctly identify a nimbiism. Uh, and people you know, incumbent protection rackets, so to speak, not just from a corporate perspective, but someone who's very satisfied with their backyard and their views and their home and their community. They don't want density, they don't want other people moving in, they don't want any infrastructure built around it. As it relates to transportation, they're very satisfied with what they have, and I think and they abuse in some respects a lot of these rules that have been around decades and decades uh to advance that aim.

Is a point and just to level set, people are listening completely agree this notion of the supply demand imbalance. I mean, you're making an econ one to one argument. Uh, And that supply to imbalance is next level in the state of California, Whi're simply not building enough housing and that goes to I mean, and you correctly identify a nimbiism. Uh, and people you know, incumbent protection rackets, so to speak, not just from a corporate perspective, but someone who's very satisfied with their backyard and their views and their home and their community. They don't want density, they don't want other people moving in, they don't want any infrastructure built around it. As it relates to transportation, they're very satisfied with what they have, and I think and they abuse in some respects a lot of these rules that have been around decades and decades uh to advance that aim.

So you identified all this, I think pretty well as a problem for the state and for you. So when you gave a State of the State a couple years back, I'm genuinely forgetting the number. What was the housing goal you set?

So you identified all this, I think pretty well as a problem for the state and for you. So when you gave a State of the State a couple years back, I'm genuinely forgetting the number. What was the housing goal you set?

We said, well, we had we had an audacious goal that was a study of studies that identified what the state would need in order to address the supply demand and ballants. But we made the point we were going through a legally binding process what we referred to as arena goals, and we've established that here is the legally binding goal two point five million units by twenty thirty, and that is the established state policy, and that's the goal. So you're not on track for that, not even close why for well number of reasons, macroeconomic. I mean, I think you have to be fair as it relates to the realities of what just occurred, as it relates to the constraints around the marketing of interest rates or interest rates are high. Obviously, we came out of a very difficult period during during COVID, but fundamentally because of the inability to get local government to get out of the way and allow for more construction. And that's why we created a Housing Accountability Unit. That's why we've taken eight hundred actions, That's why I've unlocked seventy five hundred units, uh, and that's why we have advanced forty two sequel reforms in some of the most significant housing reforms in California history. As it relates to eighty US, which you identify eighty US. Now you can buildinally do in single fami family home zoning and duplexus. But at the end of the day, state visions realized back to.

We said, well, we had we had an audacious goal that was a study of studies that identified what the state would need in order to address the supply demand and ballants. But we made the point we were going through a legally binding process what we referred to as arena goals, and we've established that here is the legally binding goal two point five million units by twenty thirty, and that is the established state policy, and that's the goal. So you're not on track for that, not even close why for well number of reasons, macroeconomic. I mean, I think you have to be fair as it relates to the realities of what just occurred, as it relates to the constraints around the marketing of interest rates or interest rates are high. Obviously, we came out of a very difficult period during during COVID, but fundamentally because of the inability to get local government to get out of the way and allow for more construction. And that's why we created a Housing Accountability Unit. That's why we've taken eight hundred actions, That's why I've unlocked seventy five hundred units, uh, and that's why we have advanced forty two sequel reforms in some of the most significant housing reforms in California history. As it relates to eighty US, which you identify eighty US. Now you can buildinally do in single fami family home zoning and duplexus. But at the end of the day, state visions realized back to.

Localists, why did the ADU effort work and the single family housing or multi family housing didn't. I mean, those were big bills and we Yimbi's greeted them with delight. But I would say everybody would say that what was it us be nine yes if the cities have made it so those don't. Actually it doesn't build as much housing it and.

Localists, why did the ADU effort work and the single family housing or multi family housing didn't. I mean, those were big bills and we Yimbi's greeted them with delight. But I would say everybody would say that what was it us be nine yes if the cities have made it so those don't. Actually it doesn't build as much housing it and.

That's why we created this housing accountability to drive more responsibility at the local level and providing technical assistance. It's not just a stick, it's also a carrot. But no, look there's the that's the construct, right, I mean, that's a classic example. People like their neighborhoods. That's the foundation of Nimbiaism. And I had look this yimbiism frame, which is yes in my backyard. For those wondering the hell we're even talking about, I embrace it. I celebrate. I don't think there's been a more yemb governor in California's history. And it's why we've signed so many of these bills and supported many of these bills. But you're right that application a lot of these are new reforms just in the last few years in this high interest rate environment. So we'll see how quickly things unlock as interest rates dropped down. But fundamentally, it's the Nimbiaism that drags it.

That's why we created this housing accountability to drive more responsibility at the local level and providing technical assistance. It's not just a stick, it's also a carrot. But no, look there's the that's the construct, right, I mean, that's a classic example. People like their neighborhoods. That's the foundation of Nimbiaism. And I had look this yimbiism frame, which is yes in my backyard. For those wondering the hell we're even talking about, I embrace it. I celebrate. I don't think there's been a more yemb governor in California's history. And it's why we've signed so many of these bills and supported many of these bills. But you're right that application a lot of these are new reforms just in the last few years in this high interest rate environment. So we'll see how quickly things unlock as interest rates dropped down. But fundamentally, it's the Nimbiaism that drags it.

Let me ask you something about the housing reforms. As I flipped the whole table this podcast. It's problem with having a podcast host on. So during the election, when Kamala Harris and then Barack Obama at the DNC, actually, by the way, on Barck Obama than Kamala Harris. We're up there talking about the need to build three million new homes, right and really sad in like Yimbi's from the stage. I was thinking, man, that is a huge intellectual victory for movement that didn't exist like twenty five minutes ago. I started thinking and and started running back the date, and I'm like, Okay, how's it working out? And you look in San Francisco and housing starts aren't up. And you look in LA and they're not up. You look in California. Not talking here about ADUs, but housing starts in January twenty twenty five were lower than in twenty fifteen. I began thinking to myself, oh shit, we actually have won an intellectual argument without winning the policy. So I began doing some reporting because I knew how many. I'm not literally how many, but I knew there's been a pretty torrid pace with you and you know, Scott Wiener and Buffy Wicks and a bunch of other housing local and the Last Day bills, and so I began calling developers in San Francisco and said, what's going on here, why don't I see a movement? And how much you're building? And what they all told me was I didn't end up writing this piece. I just didn't have time, but I meant to for some time. Was all these fast track bills required me to take on a bunch of new standards and requirements, prevailing wages and environmental standards and this and that. That made it more expensive for me to take the fast track than just do what I'm doing. It wouldn't pencil out for me to do it right. I don't know if that's one hundred percent true. I could see you. But if that's not it, why do you think all those bills didn't lead to Well.

Let me ask you something about the housing reforms. As I flipped the whole table this podcast. It's problem with having a podcast host on. So during the election, when Kamala Harris and then Barack Obama at the DNC, actually, by the way, on Barck Obama than Kamala Harris. We're up there talking about the need to build three million new homes, right and really sad in like Yimbi's from the stage. I was thinking, man, that is a huge intellectual victory for movement that didn't exist like twenty five minutes ago. I started thinking and and started running back the date, and I'm like, Okay, how's it working out? And you look in San Francisco and housing starts aren't up. And you look in LA and they're not up. You look in California. Not talking here about ADUs, but housing starts in January twenty twenty five were lower than in twenty fifteen. I began thinking to myself, oh shit, we actually have won an intellectual argument without winning the policy. So I began doing some reporting because I knew how many. I'm not literally how many, but I knew there's been a pretty torrid pace with you and you know, Scott Wiener and Buffy Wicks and a bunch of other housing local and the Last Day bills, and so I began calling developers in San Francisco and said, what's going on here, why don't I see a movement? And how much you're building? And what they all told me was I didn't end up writing this piece. I just didn't have time, but I meant to for some time. Was all these fast track bills required me to take on a bunch of new standards and requirements, prevailing wages and environmental standards and this and that. That made it more expensive for me to take the fast track than just do what I'm doing. It wouldn't pencil out for me to do it right. I don't know if that's one hundred percent true. I could see you. But if that's not it, why do you think all those bills didn't lead to Well.

A lot of them have. How we can talk about it, you know, I don't want to get into really parochial politics, but we can talk about a five hundred unit project on Stevenson Street in San Francisco was never going to get done until the state intervened and compelled the hand of the city to actually move forward again. I mean, and you've got an ideological war that's going on in progressive cities. They don't believe in the supply demand framework. They don't believe in this notion of abundance. Fundamentally, they have a d growth mindset, which you talk a lot about or at least right around in the book, And so you're struggling with that ideological spectrum. But San Francisco, I mean, it's just infamously just loves its neighborhoods. Doesn't want to see it up, so they don't want to see the density. So they're constantly pushing back against this, and we are as a state finally intervening in the ways the state is never intervened in the past. So I think it's a little too early to sort of assert that the sort of fatalist or have a fatalist a notion of what hasn't yet occurred, when in fact, we're starting now to flex our muscles and the application of these laws are now starting to fully go into effect, and ultimately we want to see them materialize and manifest. But that's I think that's that's the friction. But look, let me just stipulate again. We're not arguing here, You're one hundred percent right.

A lot of them have. How we can talk about it, you know, I don't want to get into really parochial politics, but we can talk about a five hundred unit project on Stevenson Street in San Francisco was never going to get done until the state intervened and compelled the hand of the city to actually move forward again. I mean, and you've got an ideological war that's going on in progressive cities. They don't believe in the supply demand framework. They don't believe in this notion of abundance. Fundamentally, they have a d growth mindset, which you talk a lot about or at least right around in the book, And so you're struggling with that ideological spectrum. But San Francisco, I mean, it's just infamously just loves its neighborhoods. Doesn't want to see it up, so they don't want to see the density. So they're constantly pushing back against this, and we are as a state finally intervening in the ways the state is never intervened in the past. So I think it's a little too early to sort of assert that the sort of fatalist or have a fatalist a notion of what hasn't yet occurred, when in fact, we're starting now to flex our muscles and the application of these laws are now starting to fully go into effect, and ultimately we want to see them materialize and manifest. But that's I think that's that's the friction. But look, let me just stipulate again. We're not arguing here, You're one hundred percent right.

I was asking I'm curious.

I was asking I'm curious.

No, but but also you're not. I'm you know, you talk about as a bagel of earth was everything, Yeah, everything, attack everything together. Even we're a little critical of the Biden administration and the Chips and Science Acts and the infrastructure stuff because they did the same thing. Look, you go to the.

No, but but also you're not. I'm you know, you talk about as a bagel of earth was everything, Yeah, everything, attack everything together. Even we're a little critical of the Biden administration and the Chips and Science Acts and the infrastructure stuff because they did the same thing. Look, you go to the.

Rural broadband effort. Right twenty twenty one, they passed a bi Parson infrastructure bail. We'll say it's the biggest infrastructure bill in decades, which is not wrong one point two.

Rural broadband effort. Right twenty twenty one, they passed a bi Parson infrastructure bail. We'll say it's the biggest infrastructure bill in decades, which is not wrong one point two.

Turing, but five hundred and five to fifty of.

Turing, but five hundred and five to fifty of.

New Yeah, And one of the big headline pieces of it is forty two billion dollars for World Broadband YEP twenty twenty one that passes by the end of twenty twenty four. Functioningly nobody's hooked up to Royal Broadband. And me and Derek look into it, and there is a fourteen stage process. I mean, I'm sure California was going through a fourteen stage process of their creating a map, and then the map can be challenged, and there's these letters of intent and so on and so forth, and by the end of their administration of the fifty six states and jurisdictions that were trying to apply for the money, three had made it through, which, putting aside the fact that them, me and all these people didn't get broadband, it also meant that they couldn't run on that right. So much of the political theory of the Biden administration was that if you can show liberal democracy can deliver, you will pull people out of wanting these strongmen who say they're going to burn the whole thing down and give you something out of the ashes. And if you can't, really, if the things don't move fast enough, if they don't get to the people fast enough, it's much harder for liberal democracy to make the case said it delivers. I want it to deliver. I like these policies, but the speed thing is a real problem. And I'll say one more thing, because I was talking. I did an event the other night with John Favreau and we were talking about we were talking about high speed rail, but I was saying that the stimulus bill under Obama that had three big headline projects for reinvestment. It had high speed rail, it had smart grid, and it had a nationwide system of interoperable health records.

New Yeah, And one of the big headline pieces of it is forty two billion dollars for World Broadband YEP twenty twenty one that passes by the end of twenty twenty four. Functioningly nobody's hooked up to Royal Broadband. And me and Derek look into it, and there is a fourteen stage process. I mean, I'm sure California was going through a fourteen stage process of their creating a map, and then the map can be challenged, and there's these letters of intent and so on and so forth, and by the end of their administration of the fifty six states and jurisdictions that were trying to apply for the money, three had made it through, which, putting aside the fact that them, me and all these people didn't get broadband, it also meant that they couldn't run on that right. So much of the political theory of the Biden administration was that if you can show liberal democracy can deliver, you will pull people out of wanting these strongmen who say they're going to burn the whole thing down and give you something out of the ashes. And if you can't, really, if the things don't move fast enough, if they don't get to the people fast enough, it's much harder for liberal democracy to make the case said it delivers. I want it to deliver. I like these policies, but the speed thing is a real problem. And I'll say one more thing, because I was talking. I did an event the other night with John Favreau and we were talking about we were talking about high speed rail, but I was saying that the stimulus bill under Obama that had three big headline projects for reinvestment. It had high speed rail, it had smart grid, and it had a nationwide system of interoperable health records.

I remember those days.

I remember those days.

Yeah, Oh for three. Yeah, at some point we got to be upset about this.

Yeah, Oh for three. Yeah, at some point we got to be upset about this.

You know. So you have five core chapters in this book. You talk about growth, you talk about governance, you talk about deploying, inventing. You know, a lot of language very familiar here in the state of California. Again, abundance is fundamentally foundationally who we are, at least believe we are in the state of California. And so in that respect, I agree this sort of this perception performance is one thing, and I would argue a little bit more favorably to Biden. I mean, seven hundred and seventy five thousand manufacturing jobs, just the job growth generally, and I'm not just talking about job recovery from the pandemic, but the six plus million jobs that you have to stack on that after we were back to full recovery. The fact that Chips and Science Act is producing real results as it relates to private sector investment, and the fact that we finally have an industrial policy that is worker center centric. And I think that's that worker centricity that you can argue against, because that was in you call it out and here when you talk to Gina about issues related to childcare and other aspirational frameworks as it relates to small businesses and reaching diversity goals and the like. But there is the fundamental disconnect, and you're absolutely right as it relates to these large scale, adacious projects. And I will give you your do on high speed rail. I have been as critical or more than you have about this. In fact, I appreciate you reference my pivot after I took this job as governor, where we called out the status quo and now we're trying to level set and get this back on track. But at least there's a vision. At least Obama had a vision. He wanted to be big and big things, he wanted to do big things. And at least progressive states still have a vision and they have a design. I mean, and I think that's part of an abundance frame and and and while it's difficult to manifest that vision, I don't think it's an indictment necessary it well, it's indictment in terms of our ability to deliver on time and under budget. But the vision I think is foundational and important. And I give credit to the aboveman administration in that respect. For all three, even if they were over.

You know. So you have five core chapters in this book. You talk about growth, you talk about governance, you talk about deploying, inventing. You know, a lot of language very familiar here in the state of California. Again, abundance is fundamentally foundationally who we are, at least believe we are in the state of California. And so in that respect, I agree this sort of this perception performance is one thing, and I would argue a little bit more favorably to Biden. I mean, seven hundred and seventy five thousand manufacturing jobs, just the job growth generally, and I'm not just talking about job recovery from the pandemic, but the six plus million jobs that you have to stack on that after we were back to full recovery. The fact that Chips and Science Act is producing real results as it relates to private sector investment, and the fact that we finally have an industrial policy that is worker center centric. And I think that's that worker centricity that you can argue against, because that was in you call it out and here when you talk to Gina about issues related to childcare and other aspirational frameworks as it relates to small businesses and reaching diversity goals and the like. But there is the fundamental disconnect, and you're absolutely right as it relates to these large scale, adacious projects. And I will give you your do on high speed rail. I have been as critical or more than you have about this. In fact, I appreciate you reference my pivot after I took this job as governor, where we called out the status quo and now we're trying to level set and get this back on track. But at least there's a vision. At least Obama had a vision. He wanted to be big and big things, he wanted to do big things. And at least progressive states still have a vision and they have a design. I mean, and I think that's part of an abundance frame and and and while it's difficult to manifest that vision, I don't think it's an indictment necessary it well, it's indictment in terms of our ability to deliver on time and under budget. But the vision I think is foundational and important. And I give credit to the aboveman administration in that respect. For all three, even if they were over.

Thirsk, I'm all for vision. I upset the point of this book is that I want the things to happen. I mean, we could talk about high speed rally, we must talk about high speed draft. But before we before we get there for a second, I mean, I do the question around this book because it is very critical of how liberals have governed. Well, then why you're just a Republican?

Thirsk, I'm all for vision. I upset the point of this book is that I want the things to happen. I mean, we could talk about high speed rally, we must talk about high speed draft. But before we before we get there for a second, I mean, I do the question around this book because it is very critical of how liberals have governed. Well, then why you're just a Republican?

Right?

Right?

If Texas is so good at housing? And the thing that I keep telling people is you've really confused means and ends here. Another thing that keeps coming up is like, you want deregulation. Isn't that a Republican thing? Well not if I'm deregulating the government itself so it can deliver on the things you want. What's supposed to matter in politics is not the means, it's the ends. And what I sort of want. What I'm trying to push here is for liberals to get a little bit more means agnostic and more like ends obsessed. So the thing that I the place where I probably differ a little bit in what you just said a second ago, is that I don't want to give anybody credit for a vision that didn't happen. High speed rails you have a great quote to me in this I use it in the book High speed Rails undermined the public's faith and what can get done? It undermines the next high speed rail?

If Texas is so good at housing? And the thing that I keep telling people is you've really confused means and ends here. Another thing that keeps coming up is like, you want deregulation. Isn't that a Republican thing? Well not if I'm deregulating the government itself so it can deliver on the things you want. What's supposed to matter in politics is not the means, it's the ends. And what I sort of want. What I'm trying to push here is for liberals to get a little bit more means agnostic and more like ends obsessed. So the thing that I the place where I probably differ a little bit in what you just said a second ago, is that I don't want to give anybody credit for a vision that didn't happen. High speed rails you have a great quote to me in this I use it in the book High speed Rails undermined the public's faith and what can get done? It undermines the next high speed rail?

Right.

Right.

And the thing that I want to see happen is a kind of reckoning inside the governing I would call it a culture. Not just laws. It's not just regulations, although it is all those things. But it is a culture of what happens when the Democrats who are setting this stuff up getting the room together, and people start raising their hands and saying, what about this and what about that? And how about the other thing? And instead of here and no, I think it's kind of a little bit, and it's not the only thing going on, but there is something wrong in a culture that so often fails to deliver what it promises. I mean, not just high speed rail, the big dig, the second Avenue subway, right these you know, parts of them got done in the second Avenue piece or the big dig eventually got done, but too much, too expensive. You can't do enough if you're doing that, and it's not inevitable. Europe builds trains better than we do. They just do. And they have governments I checked, and they have unions more than we do.

And the thing that I want to see happen is a kind of reckoning inside the governing I would call it a culture. Not just laws. It's not just regulations, although it is all those things. But it is a culture of what happens when the Democrats who are setting this stuff up getting the room together, and people start raising their hands and saying, what about this and what about that? And how about the other thing? And instead of here and no, I think it's kind of a little bit, and it's not the only thing going on, but there is something wrong in a culture that so often fails to deliver what it promises. I mean, not just high speed rail, the big dig, the second Avenue subway, right these you know, parts of them got done in the second Avenue piece or the big dig eventually got done, but too much, too expensive. You can't do enough if you're doing that, and it's not inevitable. Europe builds trains better than we do. They just do. And they have governments I checked, and they have unions more than we do.

So it's not just the lawyers. And you point that out of the wall.

So it's not just the lawyers. And you point that out of the wall.

Well, that's an issue I'd be very curious to hear. So this is the thing I think people don't know that I would love to hear it. To your thoughts on that we do government different in this country than they do in Europe, is a qualitative difference between it, which is they run government through bureaucracies and we restrain government through courts, which at the moment with Trump, seems good in a bunch of ways, and there are ways in which it's good, and there are also ways in which it makes it hellacious.

Well, that's an issue I'd be very curious to hear. So this is the thing I think people don't know that I would love to hear it. To your thoughts on that we do government different in this country than they do in Europe, is a qualitative difference between it, which is they run government through bureaucracies and we restrain government through courts, which at the moment with Trump, seems good in a bunch of ways, and there are ways in which it's good, and there are also ways in which it makes it hellacious.

You got it to deliver, Yeah, and I would say that's the central theory of least. The argument that I would make against the high speed rail is, I mean, look, this thing started, and you make the point it started. There was sort of talk about the vision. The original vision was not Obama, it wasn't even necessarily Jerry Brown. But you pointed nineteen eighty two when Brown at least says former Governor Jerry Brown, we should look at this high speed rail thing. And then eventually Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican puts a bond on the ballot in two thousand and eight, and the voters approve it. And you're right. There was a lot of promotion and promise. Thirty three point six billion dollars, two hours and twenty minutes downtown twenty by twenty twenty and the whole thing. And then reality. Now I get here later decade plus later and reconcile the fact that we have to dig our way out of this. There's a new reality. There's a scarcity of resources, there's an abundance of delay, there's an abundance of cost overruns, and we have to level set that we need to build something or we're left with literally nothing. We're left with pieces that go nowhere, that have no utility and actually have a long term costs. But let's do it by telling people what it is and what it's not. And so this focus on the Central Valley, which is recognized was stipulated as a requirement under the Obama grant, the three billion dollars in one of the fastest growing parts of the state, an important part of the state, a state that has deep desire to connect to the rest of the state, and a state of mind that's not just about a transportation project, but about upsony about economic development, which a lot of that has occurred in and around these new stations that have been built, fifty large scale projects, the size of three Golden Gate bridges. The entire environmental cpearance is now one hundred percent done. LA to San Francisco, there were two.

You got it to deliver, Yeah, and I would say that's the central theory of least. The argument that I would make against the high speed rail is, I mean, look, this thing started, and you make the point it started. There was sort of talk about the vision. The original vision was not Obama, it wasn't even necessarily Jerry Brown. But you pointed nineteen eighty two when Brown at least says former Governor Jerry Brown, we should look at this high speed rail thing. And then eventually Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican puts a bond on the ballot in two thousand and eight, and the voters approve it. And you're right. There was a lot of promotion and promise. Thirty three point six billion dollars, two hours and twenty minutes downtown twenty by twenty twenty and the whole thing. And then reality. Now I get here later decade plus later and reconcile the fact that we have to dig our way out of this. There's a new reality. There's a scarcity of resources, there's an abundance of delay, there's an abundance of cost overruns, and we have to level set that we need to build something or we're left with literally nothing. We're left with pieces that go nowhere, that have no utility and actually have a long term costs. But let's do it by telling people what it is and what it's not. And so this focus on the Central Valley, which is recognized was stipulated as a requirement under the Obama grant, the three billion dollars in one of the fastest growing parts of the state, an important part of the state, a state that has deep desire to connect to the rest of the state, and a state of mind that's not just about a transportation project, but about upsony about economic development, which a lot of that has occurred in and around these new stations that have been built, fifty large scale projects, the size of three Golden Gate bridges. The entire environmental cpearance is now one hundred percent done. LA to San Francisco, there were two.

Thousand, twenty twelve to twenty twenty five.

Thousand, twenty twelve to twenty twenty five.

I can't I can't make up for that. I can only deal.

I can't I can't make up for that. I can only deal.

With the quota party, which is crazy.

With the quota party, which is crazy.

It's crazy. But the point is we're at the point where just announced we're doing railhead. We're finally laying the tracks. I mean we could, we can lament about it. We absolutely learned from it, and we've stressed test a lot of it. You talk about the consulting class versus a bureaucratic class, you're absolutely right, and we started to shift that just a few years ago. But the litigation on the two thousand, two hundred and seventy parcels that we had to purchase was next level, and that delay, I think is the core of this. There's plenty of other bureaucratic malays and other issues we can identify, but back to this notion, I think you're right this idea of so I think liberal litigation. I don't know what phrase you used in the book, but we were mindful of that and critical of that, and you mark that as a big part of the sort of nineteen seventies construct in a America and tell us a little bit more about.

It's crazy. But the point is we're at the point where just announced we're doing railhead. We're finally laying the tracks. I mean we could, we can lament about it. We absolutely learned from it, and we've stressed test a lot of it. You talk about the consulting class versus a bureaucratic class, you're absolutely right, and we started to shift that just a few years ago. But the litigation on the two thousand, two hundred and seventy parcels that we had to purchase was next level, and that delay, I think is the core of this. There's plenty of other bureaucratic malays and other issues we can identify, but back to this notion, I think you're right this idea of so I think liberal litigation. I don't know what phrase you used in the book, but we were mindful of that and critical of that, and you mark that as a big part of the sort of nineteen seventies construct in a America and tell us a little bit more about.

Yeah, we can put a pin in high speed rail. There are two major liberal movements that happen in the twentieth century. The one we think about a lot is New Deal liberalism. That's the one where we build aggressively. It's a growth orient to liberalism. It's a liberalism of material goods. And it's the liberalism that defines the left right divide in our national narrative. Right liberals believe in big, strong government, conservatives believe in small, limited government. In the sixties, seventies, eighties, you have real problems that have emerged from this New Deal order. We have built heedlessly, recklessly, intensely. We are cutting highways all across the country, many of them, they're not all of them through marginalized communities, but man, the rich communities don't like it when a highway goes through either right, and they have a lot of the power that leads to this. There is a genuine spoiling of the environment. My colleague Derek likes to talk about the moment in Los Angeles. I think it's in the forties or fifties where people wake up and think there's been a chemical attack from Japanese, but it turned out that the city had launched its own chemical attack on itself.

Yeah, we can put a pin in high speed rail. There are two major liberal movements that happen in the twentieth century. The one we think about a lot is New Deal liberalism. That's the one where we build aggressively. It's a growth orient to liberalism. It's a liberalism of material goods. And it's the liberalism that defines the left right divide in our national narrative. Right liberals believe in big, strong government, conservatives believe in small, limited government. In the sixties, seventies, eighties, you have real problems that have emerged from this New Deal order. We have built heedlessly, recklessly, intensely. We are cutting highways all across the country, many of them, they're not all of them through marginalized communities, but man, the rich communities don't like it when a highway goes through either right, and they have a lot of the power that leads to this. There is a genuine spoiling of the environment. My colleague Derek likes to talk about the moment in Los Angeles. I think it's in the forties or fifties where people wake up and think there's been a chemical attack from Japanese, but it turned out that the city had launched its own chemical attack on itself.

But you'll forget. In California, a lazy pundit could suggest the modern environmental movement started in nineteen sixty seven in reaction to that in the business community saying enough and Governor RONA. Reagan established the California Air Resources Board, of which that rights and responsibility were afforded under the nineteen seventy Clean Air Act, which you also highlight in the book Richard Nixon affording California waiver so that we can address the unique air quality concerns that you identify them book.

But you'll forget. In California, a lazy pundit could suggest the modern environmental movement started in nineteen sixty seven in reaction to that in the business community saying enough and Governor RONA. Reagan established the California Air Resources Board, of which that rights and responsibility were afforded under the nineteen seventy Clean Air Act, which you also highlight in the book Richard Nixon affording California waiver so that we can address the unique air quality concerns that you identify them book.

And then of course everybody forgets it's Reagan who signs the California Environmental Quality Activity.

And then of course everybody forgets it's Reagan who signs the California Environmental Quality Activity.

Yeah, this SEQUE issue that you and others and myself.

Yeah, this SEQUE issue that you and others and myself.

It's worth I think taking time, it's worth taking I think a minute on SEQUA. So Reagan signs a bill into law. From Jake Ambnder's research, it doesn't even merit a full article in the La Times. It's interesting nobody quite knows what they've done because initially SEQUA it just says, look, when the government does stuff, it's got to produce o report on you know what the likely consequences are. No big deal. And then there is a proposed development in Mammoth, which, you know, the great ski and snowboard town, which I've been too many many.

It's worth I think taking time, it's worth taking I think a minute on SEQUA. So Reagan signs a bill into law. From Jake Ambnder's research, it doesn't even merit a full article in the La Times. It's interesting nobody quite knows what they've done because initially SEQUA it just says, look, when the government does stuff, it's got to produce o report on you know what the likely consequences are. No big deal. And then there is a proposed development in Mammoth, which, you know, the great ski and snowboard town, which I've been too many many.

Times, you Southern Californians.

Times, you Southern Californians.

Yeah, Math, But there's a mixed use development that's proposed there, you know, sort of condos and some shopping at the bottom of them, and a bunch of rich Mammothians, I don't know what they call themselves. Foul lawsuit, and they have a novel argument, which is that this development can't go forward because it violates SEQUA. And this gets rejected the courts because this is not roughly would this be I'd want to double check this, but early seven years these things, but I could be wrong with that. So so what happens here is that the courts reject this a bunch of times because Seque is about public development, and then the Supreme Court rules no no no. Public development is anything that requires a permit by the state of California. There's a Sierra Club lobbyist who we quote in the book. It says after that sequel applies to anything where you are rubbing two sticks together in the state. And so, now, having been as Ambunder puts it in his dissertation on this stuff, informed by the courts of what the law they passed actually does, the legislature puts a pause on it because now everything's in a huge legal limbo. But the key thing is at SEQUA. I mean, and I'm sure you know all this much better than I do. But Sequa's power is amplified a lot by courts that interpreted it in a way that was very different than anybody initially interpreted it. And this is part of a period in liberalism where you have this rise of an environmental movement that has legal dimensions and political dimensions, and statutory dimensions and cultural dimensions. It's Rachel Carson, It's Ralph And the key thing about this period of liberalism, the New Left period of liberalism, is it is fundamentally skeptical of government action. The New Deal is this alliance between the government, the unions and the corporations to build, to put people to work, to industrialize America and make it into this kind of advanced, globe spanning superpower. And the new Left comes in and says, we are destroying this place, We are turning this country conformists. The term tiki Taki comes from a song about Daily City and how gross all those homes are. Right, Like, there's a whole thing about the esthetic destruction of it. I have great quotes from Lyndon Johnson's speeches about we used to worry about the ugly American, Now we have to worry about the ugly America. Right, there's a whole change. It begins to happen. And the way that this moment in liberalism tries to square the circle because the new Left is part of this era that's very individualistic, right. We think about this for Reagan and individuals, but it's happening on the left too and wants a highly participatory democracy. And the way it tries to square it is create a million different ways that individuals or individuals represented by nonprofit groups typically can sue the government to stop it or force it to think about things that it wasn't thinking about before. Sorry, gott a mosquito there, And it creates ways to sue the government and force it to think about things that it wasn't thinking about or had an earlier Get.

Yeah, Math, But there's a mixed use development that's proposed there, you know, sort of condos and some shopping at the bottom of them, and a bunch of rich Mammothians, I don't know what they call themselves. Foul lawsuit, and they have a novel argument, which is that this development can't go forward because it violates SEQUA. And this gets rejected the courts because this is not roughly would this be I'd want to double check this, but early seven years these things, but I could be wrong with that. So so what happens here is that the courts reject this a bunch of times because Seque is about public development, and then the Supreme Court rules no no no. Public development is anything that requires a permit by the state of California. There's a Sierra Club lobbyist who we quote in the book. It says after that sequel applies to anything where you are rubbing two sticks together in the state. And so, now, having been as Ambunder puts it in his dissertation on this stuff, informed by the courts of what the law they passed actually does, the legislature puts a pause on it because now everything's in a huge legal limbo. But the key thing is at SEQUA. I mean, and I'm sure you know all this much better than I do. But Sequa's power is amplified a lot by courts that interpreted it in a way that was very different than anybody initially interpreted it. And this is part of a period in liberalism where you have this rise of an environmental movement that has legal dimensions and political dimensions, and statutory dimensions and cultural dimensions. It's Rachel Carson, It's Ralph And the key thing about this period of liberalism, the New Left period of liberalism, is it is fundamentally skeptical of government action. The New Deal is this alliance between the government, the unions and the corporations to build, to put people to work, to industrialize America and make it into this kind of advanced, globe spanning superpower. And the new Left comes in and says, we are destroying this place, We are turning this country conformists. The term tiki Taki comes from a song about Daily City and how gross all those homes are. Right, Like, there's a whole thing about the esthetic destruction of it. I have great quotes from Lyndon Johnson's speeches about we used to worry about the ugly American, Now we have to worry about the ugly America. Right, there's a whole change. It begins to happen. And the way that this moment in liberalism tries to square the circle because the new Left is part of this era that's very individualistic, right. We think about this for Reagan and individuals, but it's happening on the left too and wants a highly participatory democracy. And the way it tries to square it is create a million different ways that individuals or individuals represented by nonprofit groups typically can sue the government to stop it or force it to think about things that it wasn't thinking about before. Sorry, gott a mosquito there, And it creates ways to sue the government and force it to think about things that it wasn't thinking about or had an earlier Get.

That damn thing.

That damn thing.

If I got it, I'd be like a mom and that I remember the time when he truly seems superpowered. So the way they do that is they create this raft of legislation. Of it is some of it is environmental, but not all of it. And what it allows is for individuals or individuals represented by groups and a huge world of nonprofits emerges to take the best talent out of the law schools and set them to suing government to sort of enforce this. Ralph Nader, when he runs for president in two thousand, is asked what qualifies you to be president? Says he has sued more government agencies than I have. And yeah, and so this is very potent in blue states. It had a strong New Left, and we don't think about it. Really, it's not part of our national narrative of the left and the right. Our national narrative is like the guys who like government and the party that likes government and the party that doesn't. It's not that way. The right loves a big police state and the left has a very divided soul on government. It likes some kinds of government, but it hobbles government. And that sort of made sense for its time. But now we're in a different time where the problems are problems of not building enough and environmentally particularly, All of a sudden, we've gone from a period where it really was environmentally important to stop much of the things that were happening, and now we're in one where the environmental movement has to build, build, build, build the i ras of building approach to climate change, and our laws are not set up for that. And this is where I'd like to get your perspective. The thing that's also is like the Democratic coalition is not set up to revisit those laws. You all been doing little carve outs of SIQUA. Yeah, but you've not ripped it out and rebuilt it, and nor have we done that at the national level. And as much as Democrats know this, the environmental groups don't want to do that. There's a lot of power and incumbents around the legislative architecture we have now, and you don't get a huge I mean, you've tell me if this is wrong, but I feel like you don't get a huge parade for rebuilding legislative process, right zero.

If I got it, I'd be like a mom and that I remember the time when he truly seems superpowered. So the way they do that is they create this raft of legislation. Of it is some of it is environmental, but not all of it. And what it allows is for individuals or individuals represented by groups and a huge world of nonprofits emerges to take the best talent out of the law schools and set them to suing government to sort of enforce this. Ralph Nader, when he runs for president in two thousand, is asked what qualifies you to be president? Says he has sued more government agencies than I have. And yeah, and so this is very potent in blue states. It had a strong New Left, and we don't think about it. Really, it's not part of our national narrative of the left and the right. Our national narrative is like the guys who like government and the party that likes government and the party that doesn't. It's not that way. The right loves a big police state and the left has a very divided soul on government. It likes some kinds of government, but it hobbles government. And that sort of made sense for its time. But now we're in a different time where the problems are problems of not building enough and environmentally particularly, All of a sudden, we've gone from a period where it really was environmentally important to stop much of the things that were happening, and now we're in one where the environmental movement has to build, build, build, build the i ras of building approach to climate change, and our laws are not set up for that. And this is where I'd like to get your perspective. The thing that's also is like the Democratic coalition is not set up to revisit those laws. You all been doing little carve outs of SIQUA. Yeah, but you've not ripped it out and rebuilt it, and nor have we done that at the national level. And as much as Democrats know this, the environmental groups don't want to do that. There's a lot of power and incumbents around the legislative architecture we have now, and you don't get a huge I mean, you've tell me if this is wrong, but I feel like you don't get a huge parade for rebuilding legislative process, right zero.

I mean so it feels like the contrary. It's years and years of friction, trial and error. It takes a couple of years. You introduce, you socialize, it gets nowhere, finally gets through new coalition, new personalities, You finally get it done. Then two years later you're actual exercise it. I'll give you two specific examples. I have a two hundred and seventy day judicial review process that we pushed. We worked it for. Its first use case was the first above ground storage facility in California, last half century sites. It's in an offstream dam in California. At the second quite literally a week ago, for three hundred megawatt large scale solar facility which we are testing. It hardly perfect, but that was three years in the making just to have this established rule where I can finally fast track large scale projects to start addressing your point. And you're right, there was no fundamental coalition for any of that. It was a very lonely process until after years and years of trial and error, we finally broke through.

I mean so it feels like the contrary. It's years and years of friction, trial and error. It takes a couple of years. You introduce, you socialize, it gets nowhere, finally gets through new coalition, new personalities, You finally get it done. Then two years later you're actual exercise it. I'll give you two specific examples. I have a two hundred and seventy day judicial review process that we pushed. We worked it for. Its first use case was the first above ground storage facility in California, last half century sites. It's in an offstream dam in California. At the second quite literally a week ago, for three hundred megawatt large scale solar facility which we are testing. It hardly perfect, but that was three years in the making just to have this established rule where I can finally fast track large scale projects to start addressing your point. And you're right, there was no fundamental coalition for any of that. It was a very lonely process until after years and years of trial and error, we finally broke through.

Do you think you benefit from the other side of it, from being able to get these projects built, Like if you could get them built, do you think like it's an intermediate period of pain and then better politics.

Do you think you benefit from the other side of it, from being able to get these projects built, Like if you could get them built, do you think like it's an intermediate period of pain and then better politics.

It will be better politics, but I won't be around to enjoy the fruits of that. And I think that's the great struggle. To your point, I mean you made that point about Biden earlier. I mean that's just a it's forty eight months. You're in the middle of trying to address the pandemic. You've got all kinds of global issues, you've got supply train constraints, you've got war in Ukraine, You've got all of these issues, and yet he passes I refer to as a master class.

It will be better politics, but I won't be around to enjoy the fruits of that. And I think that's the great struggle. To your point, I mean you made that point about Biden earlier. I mean that's just a it's forty eight months. You're in the middle of trying to address the pandemic. You've got all kinds of global issues, you've got supply train constraints, you've got war in Ukraine, You've got all of these issues, and yet he passes I refer to as a master class.

You are more defensive of Biden's record than of your own.

You are more defensive of Biden's record than of your own.

No, I'm more proud of the work they did, breaking through actually addressing the issues that Democrats claim they wanted to address, including marginally. And I agree with you again, there's zero daylight in this book which is markable, including its own critique, my own self critique of my own state and my own performance. So it's interesting. But he had, as I said, industrial policy, there was worker centric and there was reforms at the same time, to deal with mansion, which you acknowledge in the book.

No, I'm more proud of the work they did, breaking through actually addressing the issues that Democrats claim they wanted to address, including marginally. And I agree with you again, there's zero daylight in this book which is markable, including its own critique, my own self critique of my own state and my own performance. So it's interesting. But he had, as I said, industrial policy, there was worker centric and there was reforms at the same time, to deal with mansion, which you acknowledge in the book.

Marginal Well, the progressives killed those we just killed. But you're talking about the permitting the permanent reforms.

Marginal Well, the progressives killed those we just killed. But you're talking about the permitting the permanent reforms.

But that sort of manifested and finally on the Chips and Science Act to be a version of that with Kelly and Cruz as it relates to. So there was some component parts.

But that sort of manifested and finally on the Chips and Science Act to be a version of that with Kelly and Cruz as it relates to. So there was some component parts.

And they learned on this. I mean, Brandiese, who is Biden's former a NEC director, has an awesome piece in Foreign Affairs about why we need to build faster. Right, there's learning here. But I would wish but.

And they learned on this. I mean, Brandiese, who is Biden's former a NEC director, has an awesome piece in Foreign Affairs about why we need to build faster. Right, there's learning here. But I would wish but.

If we but I'm going to let me stipulate, let me make this quickly if we can figure that out. If we can, I don't. This is this is the most one of the most important books democrats can read. Wake up. I sent this to the two leaders of my California Assembly and Senate.

If we but I'm going to let me stipulate, let me make this quickly if we can figure that out. If we can, I don't. This is this is the most one of the most important books democrats can read. Wake up. I sent this to the two leaders of my California Assembly and Senate.

You love to hear it.

You love to hear it.

I just know. No, I'm serious, I said, guys, wake this is it. I mean, we're being judged here at a different level. We've done some good things together. We got to get serious. As the spot on on a lot of this stuff. There's some you know, we had population growth, the last two years. By the way, in December they updated all the census numbers. It grew in California the last two years. He had red states that a population declined in the last few years, with the exception of Vermont. There's some QUI I can equivalent some of that respect, but fundamentally, these larger trend lines you identify and this friction struggle to build more and build better and to address I'm with you on the high speed rail. It furiates me as a taxpayer. You're one hundred percent. It's an indictment of our ability to deliver. That said, we are finally doing realized where by train sets. We got partnership with the Bright Line and High Desert Corridor. We did full electrification of Caltran seven hundred and fourteen million dollars fifty one miles. We got all the environmental work done, all the hard works now behind us. Now we're laying track and we're finally getting that first one hundred nineteen miles done. We'll get to one seventy one. It's a six point five billion dollar gap. We have strategy to address that.

I just know. No, I'm serious, I said, guys, wake this is it. I mean, we're being judged here at a different level. We've done some good things together. We got to get serious. As the spot on on a lot of this stuff. There's some you know, we had population growth, the last two years. By the way, in December they updated all the census numbers. It grew in California the last two years. He had red states that a population declined in the last few years, with the exception of Vermont. There's some QUI I can equivalent some of that respect, but fundamentally, these larger trend lines you identify and this friction struggle to build more and build better and to address I'm with you on the high speed rail. It furiates me as a taxpayer. You're one hundred percent. It's an indictment of our ability to deliver. That said, we are finally doing realized where by train sets. We got partnership with the Bright Line and High Desert Corridor. We did full electrification of Caltran seven hundred and fourteen million dollars fifty one miles. We got all the environmental work done, all the hard works now behind us. Now we're laying track and we're finally getting that first one hundred nineteen miles done. We'll get to one seventy one. It's a six point five billion dollar gap. We have strategy to address that.

I don't even want to go I want to hold high title for a second. I want to do one thing on Biden before we go.

I don't even want to go I want to hold high title for a second. I want to do one thing on Biden before we go.

But the issue with Biden is I don't know what the hell more he could have done in a short period of time to deliver on a bold vision and lay the tracks for benefits that will enjoy. Yes, not all in forty eight months, but over the course the next four eight years.

But the issue with Biden is I don't know what the hell more he could have done in a short period of time to deliver on a bold vision and lay the tracks for benefits that will enjoy. Yes, not all in forty eight months, but over the course the next four eight years.

It'll be loving Like. I'm not saying it's all his fault. That's not my point here, right, He is inheriting a government, although you see in a very dark way with Musk and Doge that a lot that was taken as a binding constraint actually isn't. So I want to hold that because I think there are things as grotesque is what that crew is doing to the government. There's also things that need to be learned from what they're doing to the government.

It'll be loving Like. I'm not saying it's all his fault. That's not my point here, right, He is inheriting a government, although you see in a very dark way with Musk and Doge that a lot that was taken as a binding constraint actually isn't. So I want to hold that because I think there are things as grotesque is what that crew is doing to the government. There's also things that need to be learned from what they're doing to the government.

But it didn't.

But it didn't.

I really think it's important to hold this in mind for all of us, because it's something I really did not understand. It did not used to take this long to deliver Medicare. Medicare delivered Medicare cards a year after they passed that bail. It took the Affordable Care Act four years to begin delivering actual insurance to any we can talk. It took on the Inflation Reduction Act, which is doing the much smaller job of just beginning to negotiate prices on some drugs three years to get that started. I mean we built I mean, these are the classic examples. But we built the Empire State Building in a year. The average environmental review takes four and a half years.

I really think it's important to hold this in mind for all of us, because it's something I really did not understand. It did not used to take this long to deliver Medicare. Medicare delivered Medicare cards a year after they passed that bail. It took the Affordable Care Act four years to begin delivering actual insurance to any we can talk. It took on the Inflation Reduction Act, which is doing the much smaller job of just beginning to negotiate prices on some drugs three years to get that started. I mean we built I mean, these are the classic examples. But we built the Empire State Building in a year. The average environmental review takes four and a half years.

Just a few years ago to get bridge. I agree, you know.

Just a few years ago to get bridge. I agree, you know.

All this The thing that I want to say about this, which is not Joe Biden's fault, but it is the fault of now. I think a long period of Democrats beginning to get accustomed to this slowness. This is not going to work politically. I agree with you are not going to hold the people you need to hold if your answer in every term is he can't feel what I did because a government takes too long. If it had to take too long, fine, but it doesn't actually right. These are man made and it's not.

All this The thing that I want to say about this, which is not Joe Biden's fault, but it is the fault of now. I think a long period of Democrats beginning to get accustomed to this slowness. This is not going to work politically. I agree with you are not going to hold the people you need to hold if your answer in every term is he can't feel what I did because a government takes too long. If it had to take too long, fine, but it doesn't actually right. These are man made and it's not.

Just government, it's also private sector. I mean, there is there is another component of this. The markets actually play a really significant outsize influence in timing on a lot of these things, on investments, et cetera.

Just government, it's also private sector. I mean, there is there is another component of this. The markets actually play a really significant outsize influence in timing on a lot of these things, on investments, et cetera.

Yeah, but they would build fast. In a lot of cases, if we let them build fast, I mean, they're not why we didn't get world broadband done.

Yeah, but they would build fast. In a lot of cases, if we let them build fast, I mean, they're not why we didn't get world broadband done.

That was not that No, but that's just you know, I agree, that's fifty states solutions, thousands thousands.

That was not that No, but that's just you know, I agree, that's fifty states solutions, thousands thousands.

Think I'm pushing on a little bit here with using the example of Biden, not you, But I do think this is I think that those of us who want to defend liberal democracy from an actual challenge to it.

Think I'm pushing on a little bit here with using the example of Biden, not you, But I do think this is I think that those of us who want to defend liberal democracy from an actual challenge to it.

Right.

Right.

One of the things Trump is getting the most mileage out of, and he says it himself all the time. I think it's why he likes what Elon Musk is doing for all. The risk of it is the sense of constant action. Yeah, all of a sudden government which normally you don't feel moving. You feel it moving, maybe badly. Maybe what you feel is the heat from it burning to the ground, but you feel movement. Right and Populace have that. They have a politics of energy almost all of the time.