Napa, CA – In California’s sprawling legislative landscape, a familiar pattern has emerged: bills that have been vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom or otherwise failed to pass often return in subsequent years, sometimes multiple times, before either gaining approval or fading away.
A recent analysis by CalMatters, a nonprofit newsroom focused on issues affecting Californians, found that at least 80 bills introduced this year closely resemble or directly replicate legislation previously vetoed by Newsom or other governors. This phenomenon highlights both the persistence of lawmakers and the influence of powerful interest groups, such as labor unions and business organizations, in shaping state policy.
One notable example is Assembly Bill 33, which seeks to ban California companies from deploying driverless trucks. The bill has been vetoed twice by Newsom in the past two years but was reintroduced this year with backing from the Teamsters union, a major political donor in the statehouse. Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, who represents the Davis area and authored the bill, maintains that the legislation is motivated by concerns over public safety and job protection rather than the union’s financial contributions.
“I’m not here to serve the lobbyists,” Aguiar-Curry said, emphasizing that the latest iteration of the bill includes adjustments designed to appeal to Newsom, such as limiting the ban to driverless trucks delivering commercial goods to residences or businesses rather than prohibiting all vehicles over 10,001 pounds.
CalMatters’ review relied on the Legislature’s bill analyses to identify previously vetoed measures, suggesting the actual number of resurrected bills may be higher. These measures address a broad range of issues, from environmental and labor regulations to public health and social justice topics.
The frequent reintroduction of failed bills contributes to the Legislature’s already overwhelming workload. With thousands of bills introduced annually, lawmakers often rush through the process, curtailing public input and debate. Critics argue this fosters a culture of secrecy, with many decisions made behind closed doors due to time constraints.
Despite these concerns, experts note that reintroducing bills can be a legitimate political strategy. Legislative historian Alex Vassar pointed out that many landmark policies, including California’s highway system and women’s suffrage, took decades of repeated efforts before becoming law.
“Using the bill as a vehicle to keep issues alive in Sacramento and the public consciousness can be an important part of advancing policy over the long term,” said Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego.
The dynamic underscores the complex interplay between policy goals, political influence, and the realities of legislative governance in California, where persistence often defines the path to change.