Stories credited to California Globe, by publication date. ChamberLight collects articles that mention the officials it tracks, so this shows its own coverage of this source, not how much the source publishes.

Stories from California Globe
Shaded: ChamberLight collected no stories, or almost none, from any outlet (a gap in its collection, not in the outlet’s publishing)

Show as a table

Month	Stories	All outlets
March 2026	4	1,063
April 2026	3	4,538
May 2026	0	none collected
June 2026	0	none collected
July 2026	0	none collected
August 2026	0	1 (collection gap)
September 2026	2	1,320

Who they cover

Party of the officials these stories are mainly about, across all 10 officials named. A story counts once for each official it is mainly about, so the split is over 14 story–official pairs, from 9 stories.

Democrat71% · 10 pairs
Party not recorded14% · 2 pairs
Independent7% · 1 pair
Republican7% · 1 pair

Most covered

Stories mainly about each official, and their share of the source’s 9 stories.

Article tone

ChamberLight’s article analysis assigns each story a tone toward the official it covers. It describes the coverage of that official, not California Globe’s stance, and reader votes do not change it. 9 stories.

Good Look: 2 (22%)
Mixed: 3 (33%)
Informational: 0 (0%)
Bad Look: 4 (44%)

Challenges to these scores

No one has challenged a score on this page yet. Anyone can; editors publish every outcome here.

Articles served from californiaglobe.com

Richard Pan Campaign Built on Explicit Lies

Richard Pan Campaign Built on Explicit Lies Politicians resort to lying when they can't sell voters on their policy positions, or they have none By Katy Grimes, September 18, 2026 10:44 am 18 Sep 2026 10:44 am As a Sacramento resident who also reports on politics at the State Capitol, I am privy

Sep 18, 20265 votes

Richard Pan Campaign Built on Explicit Lies

Sep 18, 20268 votes

Randy Villegas Cements Socialist Ties With Joint Fundraising Committee for Michigan DSA Founder

Randy Villegas Cements Socialist Ties With Joint Fundraising Committee for Michigan DSA Founder Joint fund with Michigan socialist matches Villegas's dissertation, not the mechanic ads By Megan Barth, September 16, 2026 12:06 pm 16 Sep 2026 12:06 pm Randy Villegas, the Bernie Sanders-backed Demo

Sep 16, 20269 votes

Carrie Buck Outraises Rep Dina Titus for the Second Time in NV-1

In Nevada’s First Congressional District, Republican challenger Carrie Buck has now outraised longtime Democratic incumbent Rep. Dina Titus for the second consecutive quarter. According to the latest fundraising reports, Buck raised $436,000 in the first quarter of 2026, compared to Titus’s $304,000. This marks the second straight quarter in which Buck has outraised the incumbent, following a similar edge in the previous reporting period. Buck’s fundraising continues to be driven primarily by small-dollar grassroots donors. Her campaign has emphasized practical relief measures such as no tax on tips and no tax on overtime, which directly impact many families in the district. After recently receiving Trump’s endorsement, Buck noted that Titus has lost touch with Nevadans after seven terms. I'm honored to have earned President Trump's endorsement. Dina Titus has lost touch with Nevadans. While families here struggle with rising costs, Titus voted to raise our taxes and fought to keep our borders open. We deserve better. I will fight to cut taxes, secure the border,… pic.twitter.com/w70uXQKy47 — Carrie Ann Buck, EdD (@CarrieBuckforNV) April 14, 2026 Buck, a former educator, school principal, and mother of four — including a Green Beret Army Ranger — has centered her campaign on accountability and delivering results for working families. She has criticized Titus for failing to provide meaningful relief on taxes and living costs despite years in office. Titus has relied more heavily on her established Washington networks, including PACs and larger contributions. FEC filings from the prior quarter show Titus receiving support from major Democratic megadonors, including LGBTQ activist and entrepreneur Fred Eychaner, philanthropist Philip Munger, and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker. Yet, Titus’ progressive views may align with her donors, but her voting record is further left-of-center than her district. Recent polling and race ratings add further context to the race dynamics. While NV-1 has historically leaned Democratic with a Cook Partisan Voter Index of D+2, the district has been trending more competitive in recent cycles. In the 2024 presidential race, Donald Trump carried NV-1 with approximately 50.2% to Kamala Harris’s 48.0% — a sharp flip from Biden’s 8.5-point win in 2020. In the 2024 House race, Titus won reelection with 52.0% against her Republican opponent’s 44.5%. With primaries still months away on June 9, these results show the district moving in a more competitive direction. Just days ago, President Donald Trump delivered a “complete and total” endorsement to Buck ahead of Thursday’s Las Vegas roundtable. Trump’s strong backing of Buck and Marty O’Donnell—who is vying to unseat Rep. Susie Lee in neighboring Congressional District 3—underscores the need for GOP defense and pickup’s in the razor thin House majority. House Republican leadership, including Speaker Mike Johnson, Steve Scalise, and Tom Emmer, issued a joint endorsement of Buck. They described her as “an educator and conservative community leader who will help us continue to deliver safe streets, secure borders, lower costs, and peace through strength.” Buck’s ability to consistently compete financially — and now do so for the second straight quarter — in a district focused on working-class priorities suggests the contest may prove more competitive than many initially expected.

Apr 16, 202614 votes

Trump Endorses Key Nevada Congressional Candidates Before Las Vegas Roundtable on Tax Cuts

President Donald Trump is once again flexing his influence in the Silver State, delivering decisive endorsements to two strong Republican candidates in Nevada’s competitive congressional primaries — just days ahead of his Thursday roundtable in Las Vegas focused on the historic tax relief delivered to working families through the One Big Beautiful Bill. In a pair of Truth Social posts, President Trump threw his full support behind Marty O’Donnell, the self-funding video game soundtrack composer best known for the iconic Halo series scores, in the Republican primary for Nevada’s 3rd Congressional District. Trump also backed state Sen. Carrie Buck in the 2nd Congressional District GOP primary. O’Donnell is positioning himself as an America First outsider in a district President Trump himself carried in 2024 — one of only 13 congressional seats nationwide where the President flipped the result from Democrat Susie Lee’s longtime hold. Lee, who has represented southern Las Vegas and communities like Spring Valley and Summerlin South since 2018, voted against the One Big Beautiful Bill yet later tried to take credit for its defense provisions benefiting local rare-earth mining jobs. I am truly honored to have the support of President Donald J. Trump! The stakes this midterm could not be higher. That's why when I started running, I promised I would drop out unless President Trump supported me so that Republicans could avoid wasting resources on a needless… pic.twitter.com/AMmzZpjCw4 — Marty O'Donnell (@MartyTheElder) April 14, 2026 O’Donnell has been vocal in his criticism of the incumbent, stating on social media:“Susie Lee refused to stand for Americans over illegals. She refused to stand for Iryna Zarutska’s mother. She refused to stand for victims of illegal immigration.” Contrasting himself with the longtime congresswoman, O’Donnell has said: “Unlike Susie Lee, I’m not a politician. I’m not going to DC for fame or money. I’m just a musician who deeply cares about what type of country his grandchildren will grow up in. I will be a strong conservative leader for our District and work with President Trump to continue building a strong, safe, and affordable America.” Buck, a former school principal and state senator, is also mounting a high-profile challenge against longtime Democratic Rep. Dina Titus in Nevada’s 1st Congressional District, and has sharply criticized the incumbent, stating: “Dina Titus has done nothing for the last seven terms that she’s been in there. She has done nothing for us, nothing tangible.” She has further emphasized kitchen-table issues, saying, “I want to bring truth to light, and I think oftentimes the Democrats and Dina Titus have lied to us. They told us the border is closed; they told us that they’ve made things more affordable. But yet, we all know the American people are smart.” In her campaign launch, Buck pledged: “In Congress, I’ll work alongside President Trump to lower taxes, create good-paying American jobs, restore law-and-order, and renew the American Dream for future generations.” I'm honored to have earned President Trump's endorsement. Dina Titus has lost touch with Nevadans. While families here struggle with rising costs, Titus voted to raise our taxes and fought to keep our borders open. We deserve better. I will fight to cut taxes, secure the border,… pic.twitter.com/w70uXQKy47 — Carrie Ann Buck, EdD (@CarrieBuckforNV) April 14, 2026 Nevada’s 1st Congressional District—a diverse, urban swing seat in Clark County with roughly 45–50 percent Hispanic/Latino residents—saw Titus win narrowly in 2024 with 52 percent in a district that narrowly leans Democrat. The district’s working-class, veteran, and hospitality-dependent voters may be increasingly concerned about crime, border security, and related economic impacts. President Trump’s endorsements come at a critical moment. With midterm elections looming in November 2026, President Trump is ensuring the GOP slate features candidates who will fight for the tax cuts, border security, and economic policies that delivered Nevada its strongest presidential win in years. The moves also underscore Trump’s ongoing commitment to the state where he has repeatedly proven his ability to turn blue strongholds red. Paired with Thursday’s Las Vegas roundtable spotlighting the no-tax-on-tips and no-tax-on-overtime provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill, these moves reinforce Trump’s pro-worker agenda at a time when Nevada continues to attract Californians fleeing high taxes and regulatory failure. Recent Census data shows over 53,200 Californians moved to Nevada in 2024 alone, contributing to the state’s net domestic migration gains while California suffers ongoing losses exceeding 200,000 residents annually. This migration wave — driven by Nevada’s no-income-tax environment and lower cost of living — is already shifting voter registration toward Republicans, as documented in our prior reporting on the Republican exodus from Sacramento’s failed policies. On Thursday, April 16, President Trump will headline a roundtable discussion at the AC Hotel in Las Vegas’ Symphony Park, spotlighting the no-tax-on-tips provision and other worker-friendly reforms from the Working Families Tax Cut Act — a cornerstone of the One Big Beautiful Bill signed into law by the President on July 4, 2025. The event will feature everyday Nevadans — police officers, firefighters, casino workers, and small business owners — who are already seeing the benefits of lower taxes on overtime, tips, and hard-earned income. Nevada Democrats, still reeling from their string of losses and desperate to import California’s failing progressive model, have spent the past year scrambling. Just last month, they rolled out the red carpet for Gov. Gavin Newsom in Las Vegas, openly embracing the same big-government agenda that has driven record numbers of Californians — including wealth creators and working families — to flee to Nevada for opportunity and lower costs.

Apr 15, 20268 votes

Trump Endorses Key Nevada Congressional Candidates Before Las Vegas Roundtable on Tax Cuts

Apr 15, 202620 votes

Trump Endorses Key Nevada Congressional Candidates Before Las Vegas Roundtable on Tax Cuts

Apr 15, 20269 votes

#MeToo Part Deux? Dem Activists Accuse Rep Eric Swalwell of Sexual Harassment

Today, the Globe reports that California Democrat congressman and gubernatorial candidate Eric Swalwell has been making payments from his campaign to his wife, Brittany Swalwell, for “childcare” of their own children according to newly highlighted Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings. “FEC records reviewed by multiple outlets show Swalwell’s congressional and gubernatorial campaigns have reimbursed him or paid out more than $244,000 in childcare expenses between 2019 and 2025—the highest total of any member of the House of Representatives. In 2022 alone, his campaign made 57 separate childcare payments totaling nearly $60,000. Additional reports indicate over $22,000 in childcare disbursements just in the final months of 2025,” the Globe reported. If that’s not sordid and unethical enough, Cheyenne Hunt, an attorney, Democratic activist and executive director of Gen Z for Change, said she has been working with a number of women are preparing to accuse Swalwell of sexual misconduct. Hunt posted to X this morning: “I have been working with a number of women who are in the process of coming forward and sharing their stories of sexual harassment and even alleged abuse at the hands of Eric Swalwell. Here’s why we’re talking about it before mainstream media:” I have been working with a number of women who are in the process of coming forward and sharing their stories of sexual harassment and even alleged abuse at the hands of Eric Swalwell. Here’s why we’re talking about it before mainstream media: — Cheyenne Hunt (@CheyenneHuntCA) April 6, 2026 Cheyenne Hunt continued, noting that a friend of hers is an alleged victim of Swalwell: “I got involved because the first victim who approached me is a close friend, but when I saw that there were others who’s experiences fit the same pattern of manipulation and abuse of power, I knew I couldn’t stay silent. She said the alleged victims were targeted employees, interns, and fans: “Targeting employees, interns, and fans. Acting as a mentor just to exploit that power. DMs and Snapchat messages. Allegations ranging from uncomfortable comments to potentially criminal conduct. The number of credible women who have come forward since I posted my video is pretty shocking and connecting them with the investigative reporting teams who have been working on breaking this for years has greatly expedited this process. I am confident this story will break soon.” Okay. Details please? The video Hunt referred to was posted to Instagram on March 31 claiming that Swalwell “has a known history of being predatory towards women. And while it may be seen as politically expedient to sweep this under the rug, it is the wrong thing to do and we know it,” she added in the video. “I worked on the Hill, I know many women who still do and this message that I received yesterday is not unique.” Hunt says: “One more key point I want to share: I am an attorney. I am well aware of the risk I am taking by speaking out publicly and that fact that if I were to lie about a powerful public figure on a platform of my size, I could easily be subject to a defamation lawsuit. We have secured pro bono legal representation for them and they are in the process of sharing information with reporters and ensuring that they are physically and legally safe. That process takes time.” Several others commented on Hunt’s post, appearing to chime in on the sexual harassment allegation, but offering nothing concrete. Rep. Swalwell may be a contemptible, despicable, opportunistic crappy boss, scumbag, with a history of a “Fang Fang bang bang,” and a lavish lifestyle his bank accounts don’t appear large enough to afford, but these latest allegations feel a little too much like the #MeToo movement in 2018, where it appeared that female California politicians were behind it, even when they had their own closeted skeletons. Several male lawmakers were ousted or quietly left after various forms of harassment, sexual and otherwise, were alleged, and apparently enough to cause investigations and resignations. However, not all women should be believed. Former Rep. Katie Hill, the California Democrat who resigned following her très bizarre multi-layered “throuple” threesome sex scandal with a younger female staffer, tried to portray herself as a victim. A complaint filed with the Federal Elections Commission said the young female staffer, Morgan Desjardins, was paid to be available for personal and private purposes unrelated to the Rep. Hill’s congressional campaign. As such, as a candidate in the 2017-2018 election cycle, Katie Hill misused campaign funds for her personal use, the complaint alleges. And in 2018, I reported that the #MeToo Movement appeared to be compromised by one of its leaders, Democrat California Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia, after sexual harassment allegations against her surfaced in a report that she sexually harassed and groped a former legislative staffer; and, a lobbyist allegedly accused Garcia of attempting to grab his crotch. Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia was disciplined for sexual harassment, and removed from all committee posts. However, a rather dubious internal Assembly investigation “mostly cleared” Garcia, only chastising her for vulgar language. Her accuser sued Garcia and the state Assembly in U.S. District Court in Sacramento and charged that he suffered “blatant gender bias” by the California Assembly, arguing they failed to adequately address his #MeToo case because he is a male victim, Politico reported. There’s a lot of smoke around Eric Swalwell, and a lot of dirt, and sleaze, and unethical behaviors, but these latest sexual harassment allegations feel more like an opponent wants him out of the way. à titre d’exemple: Eric Swalwell’s odds to become California’s next Governor collapse to 44% as accusations of harassment surface. Tom Steyer’s odds jump to 33% https://t.co/pw60jJHauB pic.twitter.com/foeHTMXo4Q — Benjamin Freeman (@benwfreeman1) April 6, 2026 I’ll reserve my ire for when evidence and receipts are produced.

Apr 7, 202630 votes

Supreme Court Hears Landmark Case on Whether Federal Law Bars Counting Ballots Received After Election Day

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the consolidated high-stakes election integrity cases—Watson v. Republican National Committee and the companion Libertarian Party of Mississippi v. Wetzel—that could fundamentally reshape how federal elections are conducted nationwide. MASSIVE: TODAY is @JudicialWatch Supreme Court argument that could result in STOPPING over 30 states from counting of ballots that arrive days and weeks AFTER Election Day. Most important election integrity case in modern history.pic.twitter.com/6hLnvGhuGI — Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) March 23, 2026 Judicial Watch, representing the Libertarian Party of Mississippi and partnered with former Solicitor General Paul Clement, argued that federal Election Day statutes (including 3 U.S.C. § 1 and provisions dating back to 1845) require ballots not only to be cast or postmarked by Election Day but also received by election officials on or before that uniform national deadline. The Fifth Circuit previously struck down Mississippi’s law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted if received up to five days after Election Day, finding it preempted by federal law. A Supreme Court ruling in favor of the challengers could invalidate similar “grace period” laws in more than a dozen states, potentially affecting hundreds of thousands of ballots in future elections. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton described the case as “the most important election integrity case in modern history,” asserting that permitting ballots to “trickle in” days or even weeks after Election Day undermines the single, uniform Election Day set by Congress, creates opportunities for fraud, and erodes public confidence. “Federal law sets one Election Day. That deadline should be enforced,” Fitton stated. The petitioners contend that the ordinary historical meaning of “election” includes the full process up to receipt of ballots, and that post-Election Day counting represents a modern departure without strong precedent. During oral arguments, Justice Samuel Alito delivered a sharp analogy to counter arguments for flexibility in ballot receipt deadlines, emphasizing the fixed and precise nature of federal Election Day. He stressed that Congress established a single, uniform Election Day—the Tuesday after the first Monday in November—with a clear, non-extendable endpoint for casting votes. Alito drew direct parallels to how Americans observe other nationally recognized fixed holidays and observances to illustrate the point: We celebrate a specific Birthday (not a vague period “around your birthday”). We have Independence Day on July 4th exactly—not over several days or with a “grace period.” We observe George Washington Day (also known as Presidents’ Day or Washington’s Birthday) on the designated third Monday in February as a precise federal holiday. The same holds for Memorial Day, Labor Day, and other holidays, which are tied to exact dates or specified Mondays without ambiguity or extensions. Alito: "We have lots of phrases that involve two words, the second of which is 'day.' Labor Day, Memorial Day, George Washington's birthday, Independence Day, birthday, and Election Day. They are all particular days. So if we start with that, if I have nothing more to look at… pic.twitter.com/DaBzSxjI7M — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 23, 2026 Alito’s full analogy drove home the challengers’ core argument: Just as these holidays are pinpointed to specific days with no leeway for extension (e.g., no one claims fireworks can be set off “around” July 4th over a week-long window), federal law demands that Election Day function as a hard, uniform deadline. Allowing states to receive and count ballots days later effectively extends or moves the “election” beyond Congress’s statutory intent, treating Election Day as flexible rather than final. This line of questioning by Justice Alito highlighted skepticism toward claims that mailing delays or voter convenience justify post-Election Day receipt, reinforcing the need for strict rules to ensure election certainty, prevent manipulation, and preserve public trust. States That Currently Count Ballots Received After Election Day According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), 14 states plus the District of Columbia permit grace periods for regular domestic mail ballots received after Election Day if postmarked on or before Election Day (with variations for unclear postmarks or UOCAVA ballots). A total of 29 states extend this to military and overseas ballots. Judicial Watch has indicated that over 30 jurisdictions could be affected, including eight states that count certain late ballots even without a postmark. Four states (Ohio, Kansas, North Dakota, and Utah) have recently repealed their grace periods in anticipation of the ruling. Key states with grace periods for regular mail ballots include: Washington: Up to 21 days after Election Day. California: Up to 7 days after Election Day (postmarked by Election Day). Nevada: Up to approximately 4 days after (postmarked by Election Day or unclear postmark handled until the third day after). Mississippi: Up to 5 days after (the law at issue). Alaska: Up to 10 days after. Texas: 1 day after. Others: Illinois, New Jersey, and states with shorter or conditional extensions. How Many Ballots Were Counted After Election Day? (2024 Data) In the 2024 general election, more than 750,000 ballots were received and counted after Election Day in grace-period jurisdictions. Notable figures include: Washington: Approximately 127,000 ballots (about 3% of total votes). California: Approximately 373,000 ballots (2.3% of total). Nevada: Approximately 11,900 ballots in its two largest counties (Clark County ~9,500; Washoe County ~2,400), under 1% but potentially decisive in close races. Nevada also processes ballots without clear postmarks up to post-Election Day cutoffs. Other states filled the remainder, with late ballots often prolonging certification or deciding tight contests. Notable Controversies Nevada’s grace period for late-arriving mail ballots drew intense national scrutiny following the 2022 U.S. Senate election. Democratic incumbent Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto narrowly defeated Republican challenger Adam Laxalt by just 7,928 votes (498,316 to 490,388), a margin of roughly 0.78%. The race remained uncalled for four days after Election Day. Laxalt initially led based on strong in-person and rural county voting. However, thousands of mail-in ballots received and counted in the days following Election Day—primarily from Democratic strongholds in Clark County—flipped the outcome to Cortez Masto, ultimately securing Democratic control of the U.S. Senate. Republicans, including the Laxalt campaign, raised serious concerns about the process, pointing to potential ballot harvesting, questions over chain of custody for late-arriving ballots, aggressive signature curing, lax signature verification, and the broader issue of votes continuing to arrive and be tabulated well after polls closed. In California, Democrat Adam Gray defeated Rep. John Duarte by 187 votes in a race where late mail in ballots flipped the race. The closeness of the race, and California’s decision to continue counting votes that arrived up to 7 days past election day, caused the Republican National Committee (RNC) to file lawsuits against California. The 30 days extension that allows counting of curated and late votes also became a cause celebre, with even President elect Donald Trump weighing in on the issue. Many Republicans have also said that the 13th District, as well as the 45th district where Congresswoman Michelle Steel (R-CA) lost, had been decided not on the election day vote count, but through late and curated ballots that in most other states would be illegal to count. “It is absurd for California to accept ballots by mail up to seven days after Election Day and take almost a month to count them,” said former RNC Chairman Michael Whatley. “The RNC, alongside the California Republican Party, will continue to fight aggressively to force all states to stop accepting ballots after Election Day.” California’s and Nevada’s extended receipt and canvass periods have drawn repeated scrutiny for enabling late-arriving ballots, potential harvesting, and results shifting weeks after polls close. The Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision will determine whether Congress’s uniform Election Day mandate overrides state extensions. Supporters argue it restores integrity and finality; critics warn of disenfranchising voters facing mailing issues. The outcome will govern rules for the 2026 midterms and elections ahead.

Mar 23, 202613 votes

Nevada Democrats Vote Against Bill To Deport Illegal Aliens Convicted of Welfare Fraud

In a rare display of common-sense governance amid a border crisis engineered by the Biden-Harris administration, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 1958, the Deporting Fraudsters Act, by a vote of 231-186 on Wednesday. The bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act and mandates automatic deportation for illegal aliens convicted of committing welfare fraud or stealing public benefits meant for American taxpayers and legal residents. Covered offenses include fraud involving SNAP (food stamps), Social Security benefits, Medicaid, other federally funded programs, and the production of fraudulent identification documents. The legislation aims to protect taxpayer-funded resources from abuse by illegal aliens, ensuring swift removal rather than prolonged legal proceedings or continued access to benefits intended for American citizens and legal residents. Yet, once again, Nevada’s Democratic congressional delegation chose to stand with lawbreakers over the hardworking families of the Silver State. Nevada’s lone Republican representative from Northern Nevada, Rep. Mark Amodei (NV-2), voted YES to protect American taxpayers. All three Las Vegas-based Nevada Democrats—Rep. Dina Titus (NV-1), Rep. Susie Lee (NV-3), and Rep. Steven Horsford (NV-4)—voted NO, effectively shielding illegal aliens who defraud welfare programs from automatic removal. These are the same members who have repeatedly prioritized open-border policies over Nevada’s sovereignty, fiscal sanity, and safety. This vote isn’t an outlier. We need more tourists, not terrorists. https://t.co/f0tBZirCjO — Dina Titus (@repdinatitus) February 2, 2026 As the California Globe previously reported, Nevada Democrats have united in outrage over ICE operations and pushed to defund and restrict federal agents enforcing immigration laws. Titus publicly referred to ICE agents as “terrorists.” Her Nevada Democratic colleagues, including Senator Jacky Rosen and Rep. Horsford, have similarly labeled ICE actions as “terrorizing” and are on the record supporting sanctuary state policies. Their opposition to the Deporting Fraudsters Act follows the same pattern of placing illegal aliens above Nevada taxpayers already burdened by inflation, housing shortages, and strained social services. The bill’s passage sends a clear message: fraud against the American welfare system by those who entered the country illegally will no longer be tolerated with a mere slap on the wrist. Yet Nevada’s Democratic trio stood in the way, joining 183 other mostly Democrat “no” votes. This comes just months after the California Globe exposed how Rep. Susie Lee took credit for defense provisions in the “One Big Beautiful Bill” while voting against the very legislation that funded them. Last September, Lee voted against the Stop Illegal Entry Act, a bill to harshen prison sentences for illegal immigrants convicted of repeatedly entering the United States illegally or entering the country and committing a felon It also follows the DOJ’s signing of a new immigration enforcement agreement with Nevada, which these same Democrats have undermined at every turn. This vote occurs against the backdrop of Nevada’s significant illegal immigrant population and associated issues highlighted in California Globe coverage. According to reports, Nevada has seen an increase of 562 percent in the state’s illegal immigrant population since 2021. In Nevada, during the four years of the Biden administration, rents skyrocketed, but since January of this year, they have declined by an average of three percent. “The research literature has generally found that increases in immigration raise state and local governments’ spending — particularly on education, health care, and housing — more than their revenues,” according to a report by Numbers USA. According to FAIR US, in 2023 illegal immigration cost Nevada taxpayers an estimated $2 billion, or nearly $2,000 per Nevada household annually. Estimates place Nevada’s undocumented population at approximately 199,000, representing nearly 10 percent of the state’s roughly 3.2 million residents—one of the highest shares in the nation. This figure has been cited in multiple reports, underscoring the strain on housing, public resources and services in a state already facing fiscal pressures. As Republicans flee California’s failed progressive policies for Nevada—seeking lower taxes, safer streets, and actual border security—the state’s Democratic representatives are doubling down on the same failed ideology that drove that exodus in the first place. Nevadans deserve representatives who vote to deport fraudsters, secure the border, and put American citizens first—not coddle those gaming the system. With H.R. 1958 now headed to the Senate, it is unlikely that Nevada’s Democratic Senators Catherine Cortez-Masto and Jacky Rosen will finally get on the right side of history before taxpayers foot yet another bill for unchecked illegal immigration. The Globe will continue to monitor the bill’s progress.

Mar 19, 20269 votes

Nevada Democrats Vote Against Bill To Deport Illegal Aliens Convicted of Welfare Fraud

Mar 19, 20267 votes

Nevada Democrats Vote Against Bill To Deport Illegal Aliens Convicted of Welfare Fraud

Mar 19, 20266 votes

Former Nevada State Senator James Settelmeyer Files for Nevada’s 2nd Congressional

James Settelmeyer, a longtime Nevada Republican legislator, cattle rancher, and current Director of the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, officially filed today to run for Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District. Settelmeyer contacted the California Globe directly after filing his candidacy papers with the Nevada Secretary of State’s Office. Glad to see a real Northern Nevadan like @SettelmeyerNV file for CD2. And Happy Birthday, too! pic.twitter.com/cOTXhpmdmG — Andrew Diss (@AndrewDissNV) March 6, 2026 The seat is being vacated by retiring Rep. Mark Amodei (R-NV), who has represented the northern Nevada district since 2011. Settelmeyer’s announcement adds a well-known Northern Nevada conservative voice to what is becoming a crowded Republican primary in this reliably red district, which covers Reno, Carson City, and vast rural areas including Churchill, Douglas, Elko, Eureka, Humboldt, Lander, Lyon, Pershing, Storey, and White Pine counties. A fourth-generation Nevada rancher from Douglas County, Settelmeyer served 16 years in the Nevada Legislature: four years in the Assembly (2006–2010) and 12 years in the Senate representing District 17 (covering Churchill, Douglas, Lyon, and Storey counties) until 2022. He rose to become Senate Republican Leader and was known for his staunch advocacy on issues like property rights, natural resource management, and constitutional protections. Thank you to Senator @LVchrisbrooks for autographing SB254 which seeks to cap greenhouse gas emissions. I voted “no” after telling the committee “I am a cattle rancher and I have some cows that fart.” Chris even though we don’t always agree at least we agree to be friends. #nvleg pic.twitter.com/A1G8c9Hrz8 — James Settelmeyer (@SettelmeyerNV) April 5, 2019 During his legislative career, Settelmeyer played a key role in challenging what he viewed as unconstitutional tax increases. In 2019, he led a group of Senate Republicans in filing a successful lawsuit against then-Gov. Steve Sisolak and Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro, who is a Democrat running for Attorney General in November. The suit contested Senate Bills 542 and 551, which extended a DMV technology fee and repealed a payroll tax trigger without the required two-thirds supermajority vote under Nevada’s Constitution (Article 4, Section 18). In 2021, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled in the Republicans’ favor, declaring portions of the bills unconstitutional for bypassing the supermajority requirement on revenue-generating measures. The decision invalidated tens of millions in projected revenue collections and highlighted Settelmeyer’s dedication to fiscal restraint and constitutional fidelity. Settelmeyer has also been vocal about environmental and land-use policies affecting Nevada. As an appointed representative on the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) Governing Board, and through his legislative oversight roles, he has criticized the bi-state agency for failing to adequately reflect the interests of Nevadans. He has argued that TRPA decisions often prioritize broader regional or California’s concerns over local economic needs, property rights, and community input in the Lake Tahoe Basin—issues he has championed in committee hearings and public statements. Now serving under Gov. Joe Lombardo as Director of Conservation and Natural Resources since 2023, Settelmeyer oversees policies on wildlife, forestry, parks, and water resources—experience he is expected to bring to Congress to advocate for rural Nevada, responsible land management, and reduced federal overreach. The Republican primary field is growing rapidly during the filing period (which runs through March 13). Other GOP candidates who have already filed include Jennifer Billat, Tom Doyle, Kameron Hawkins, Rick Shepherd, Dr. Fred Simon, Monica Jaye Stabbert, Sherman Tylawsky, and retired Eureka County Sheriff Jesse Watts. Additionally, Col. David Flippo (R), a retired military officer, has recently entered the race after initially exploring a different congressional bid in Southern Nevada. In 2022, Flippo ran unsuccessfully in Assembly District 37, placing third in the GOP Primary and in 2024, he lost the Republican primary in Nevada’s Congressional District 4. Flippo has received an endorsement from Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio and support from the Arizona-based Turning Point USA (TPUSA), signaling strong backing from out-of-state national conservative activist and consultant networks. Flippo visits the congressional district but resides in Las Vegas, NV. The Globe has confirmed through multiple sources that Governor Lombardo is likely to endorse Settlemeyer in the crowded GOP field as Settelmeyer’s name recognition, rural roots, and track record position him as a formidable contender among the GOP base in this rural and large district. Paul Enos, CEO of the Nevada Trucking Association, threw his personal support behind Settlemeyer with his endorsement in a written statement to the Globe: “I am proud to personally endorse James Settelmeyer, a lifelong Nevadan who lives, serves, and leads in our state. James is unafraid to confront flawed policies from any quarter, he successfully sued Governor Sisolak and Senate Majority Leader Cannizzaro in 2019—alongside the Nevada Trucking Association—for violating the state constitution by passing fee increases without the required two-thirds vote, ensuring accountability to the rules the people set in the Nevada Constitution. Since Congressional District 2 was established in 1982, its voters have chosen dedicated public servants with deep roots in Northern Nevada. We have never sent an orangutan to Washington D.C., and it’s offensive that people who live outside the district or have relocated here solely to run for office presume they can represent us better than those who truly live and work here. We deserve authentic leaders, not political opportunists.”

Mar 6, 20269 votes

Santini-Burton Act Modernization Act: Conservation Plan for Lake Tahoe or a Quiet Federal Land Power Grab?

For more than four decades, the Santini-Burton Act has created one of the strongest conservation frameworks safeguarding Lake Tahoe’s lands and open spaces. Passed by Congress in 1980, the original Santini-Burton Act was intended to curb the overdevelopment of environmentally sensitive lands in the Lake Tahoe Basin. Its mandate was clear: acquire high-risk parcels and permanently remove them from the development pipeline. However, Senate Bill S.3695— the Santini-Burton Modernization Act of 2026– introduced in January by Nevada Democrat Senator Catherine Cortez Masto and cosponsored by Senators Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Alex Padilla (D-CA) and Adam Schiff (D-CA), would substantially alter that protective framework. The modernized bill redirects long-standing conservation constraints toward unlocking funds, expanding flexible management authority, and broadening Washoe tribal stewardship by designating the Washoe Tribe as a primary recipient of acquired lands. While keeping its original name, the modernization bill completely redefines permissible uses of taxpayer funds and lands, shifting the program from a permanent land-acquisition safeguard towards a broader bureaucratic-management discretion across the Tahoe Basin. When a law designed to prevent development pressure is rewritten to “modernize” and “manage” land rights — while introducing new transfer pathways without clearly defined long-term guardrails — the public has every reason to ask what, exactly, is being modernized. Roughly 90 percent of the Tahoe Basin is publicly owned — a direct result of the original law. But now, under the banner of “modernization,” a profound and largely unexamined policy shift is underway — one that could transform this conservation firewall into something very different and detrimental. According to TRPA, this bill has been in the works for a very long time, yet very few people are talking about it. Public messaging about Tahoe’s land “modernization” sounds reassuring. It speaks of stewardship, environmental progress, and, allegedly, protects the Tahoe Basin’s future. But the key language tells a different story. Instead of emphasizing permanent protection, the modernization framework repeatedly focuses on “unlocking funds” and enabling federal agencies to “manage” Santini-Burton lands. That wording raises a red flag—not only for what it says, but what it omits. In federal land policy, “management flexibility” does not simply mean preservation. It can include land exchanges, long-term leasing, rights-of-way, commercial recreation concessions, infrastructure siting, and in some cases, disposal authority. Public ownership does not automatically guarantee permanent protection. Yet nowhere in the modernization bill is there any explicit commitment that these lands will remain forever shielded from land development uses. This omission signals a fundamental philosophical shift: from permanent conservation to flexible federal land control— from federal land protection to federal land inventory. The Santini-Burton parcels — thousands of open lots scattered throughout Tahoe neighborhoods — were originally acquired to prevent urban intensification and preserve environmental buffers.Over time, they have taken on another critical function: public safety infrastructure. These open parcels now serve as fuel breaks, evacuation staging areas, and density buffers in one of the most wildfire-vulnerable regions in the United States. Yet in the entire modernization discussion, wildfire evacuation risk is never mentioned. Not once. This silence is extraordinary given that Tahoe’s evacuation constraints are well documented. Limited highways, geographic choke points, and peak visitation levels create a life-safety vulnerability unmatched in most American communities. Evacuation times across the basin run from five to 14 hours or more. Traffic backup from the Caldor Fire (Photo: ABC Youtube video) Ignoring this reality, while simultaneously discussing increased “management flexibility,” raises a serious question: Are conservation lands being quietly repositioned as assets to accommodate future growth pressures? This concern extends beyond land-use theory and into the economic realities facing local communities. As more land converts to public ownership, the property tax base can shrink, development opportunities narrow, and housing supply tightens. Meanwhile, tourism continues to grow, increasing demands on local infrastructure and services, even as federally owned lands generate little direct local revenue. For many residents, the concern is less about conservation itself than a broader governance shift — one in which decision-making authority moves upward while local influence diminishes, leaving communities feeling they bear the real costs while others enjoy the perceived and financial benefits. Viewed in context, the Democrat-led modernization bill reflects a broader governance trend. (Image generated by AI) Across California and the West, land-use authority is increasingly shifting away from local communities and toward federal and regional agencies operating under environmental or climate policy frameworks—a shift often framed as necessary for coordinated resource management. However, modernization also carries important governance implications: it may reduce local decision-making authority, increase federal discretion over how public lands are used, expand the ability to repurpose conservation lands for infrastructure or recreation expansion, and limit transparency regarding long-term planning outcomes. In Tahoe, where federal agencies already control the vast majority of land, this shift effectively consolidates more centralized power over the Basin’s future from Washington D.C. The result? Local residents bear the risks. Federal agencies, from afar, exercise the authority but reject the risks. Updating funding mechanisms and improving forest management flexibility can be legitimate goals. But without transparency, any modernization of existing law deserves answers to the following questions: Will Santini-Burton lands remain permanently protected from exchange, leasing, or development-enabling uses? Will evacuation capacity be treated as a primary constraint in Basin planning? Or is Tahoe’s conservation legacy quietly being repurposed into a land-management framework designed to absorb future visitation and growth pressures? These are not trivial concerns. They go straight to the heart of what Santini-Burton was created to prevent: the progressive encroachment upon a fragile and geographically constrained Tahoe basin. Once this barrier is broken, it cannot easily be rebuilt. For those who call Lake Tahoe home, there is a growing sense of broken trust, bent rules and ever weakened safeguards for meaningful preservation. One East Shore resident challenges the modernization framework: “This is a complete deviation from Santini-Burton’s original purpose. It redistributes funds held in trust to federal agencies and entities that lack transparency and accountability.” Lake Tahoe is not simply another federal land management unit. It is a living watershed, a wildfire-exposed community, and a national treasure whose protection required decades of bipartisan commitment. Modernization should strengthen that protection — not quietly redefine it. If this shift proceeds without clear guardrails, Tahoe may belatedly discover that a law designed to stop development pressure has instead become a tool to manage — and ultimately accommodate — the very encroachment it was meant to restrain. Such an outcome would mark one of the most consequential policy inversions in Lake Tahoe’s history.

Mar 4, 202612 votes

Search

Scores for California Globe

Credibility

Political lean

Originality

Stories ChamberLight collected, by month

Top topics

Who they cover

Most covered

Article tone

Challenges to these scores

Articles served from californiaglobe.com

Richard Pan Campaign Built on Explicit Lies

Richard Pan Campaign Built on Explicit Lies

Randy Villegas Cements Socialist Ties With Joint Fundraising Committee for Michigan DSA Founder

Carrie Buck Outraises Rep Dina Titus for the Second Time in NV-1

Trump Endorses Key Nevada Congressional Candidates Before Las Vegas Roundtable on Tax Cuts

Trump Endorses Key Nevada Congressional Candidates Before Las Vegas Roundtable on Tax Cuts

Trump Endorses Key Nevada Congressional Candidates Before Las Vegas Roundtable on Tax Cuts

#MeToo Part Deux? Dem Activists Accuse Rep Eric Swalwell of Sexual Harassment

Supreme Court Hears Landmark Case on Whether Federal Law Bars Counting Ballots Received After Election Day

Nevada Democrats Vote Against Bill To Deport Illegal Aliens Convicted of Welfare Fraud

Nevada Democrats Vote Against Bill To Deport Illegal Aliens Convicted of Welfare Fraud

Nevada Democrats Vote Against Bill To Deport Illegal Aliens Convicted of Welfare Fraud

Former Nevada State Senator James Settelmeyer Files for Nevada’s 2nd Congressional

Santini-Burton Act Modernization Act: Conservation Plan for Lake Tahoe or a Quiet Federal Land Power Grab?