August 12, 2025 • 36 mins
How do bills really get passed — or stopped — in California? 🏛️
In this episode of Meyerside Chats, Evan Meyer sits down with California State Senator Roger Niello (6th District, Vice Chair of the Senate Budget Committee) to discuss:
- The real process behind passing legislation — and why some bills never see a vote.
- The Title & Summary Bill and efforts to reduce bias in ballot measures.
- California’s budget challenges and the push for fiscal responsibility.
- The role of transparency, bipartisanship, and civic engagement in a supermajority state.
- How artificial intelligence could change government operations.
Whether you’re passionate about politics, governance, or understanding how laws are made, this conversation offers a rare insider’s perspective on the power and process shaping California.
📌 Chapters:
0:00 Intro
3:00 How Bills Live or Die in Sacramento
10:00 Bias in Ballot Summaries
18:00 Civic Education & Engagement
19:00 California’s Budget Challenges
30:00 AI in the Legislature
34:00 Closing Thoughts
About Evan Meyer
Tech entrepreneur and civic leader - he founded mygovtools.org, a platform to drive government efficiency, constituent representation, and civic engagement; BeautifyEarth.com, a platform accelerating urban beautification through art; and its sister nonprofit, transforming schools in underserved areas. He also co-founded RideAmigos.com, a platform that optimizes commuter travel globally. Previously, he served as District Director for the California State Senate and led many civic initiatives in Santa Monica. Through seminars and his podcast Meyerside Chats, Evan inspires civic engagement, innovation, and cultural growth.
He loves the outdoors, is a master of creative projects, is an avid muralist and musician, and finds the world fascinating in every regard.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Evan Meyer (00:00):
Welcome to Meyer Side Chats, the podcast where
leadership, innovation, andgovernance meets solutions
oriented thinking and civildiscourse to shape better
communities.
Today I am honored to be joinedby California State Senator
Roger Nelo.
Senator Nelo represents thesixth Senate district and brings
decades of public service andbusiness experience to
(00:22):
Sacramento.
He's currently the vice chair ofSenate budget Committee amongst
a bunch of committees, actually.
And, and he is been aconsistent, a advocate for
fiscal responsibility,structural reform, and pragmatic
governance.
Senator, thank you for joiningus today.
Senator Roger Niello (00:39):
Well, thanks for having me.
But you start out saying acivil, I've gotta be civil.
Evan Meyer (00:45):
Oh, well, you know, if we want more clicks, we might
as well make this heated andcontravertial Let's get into
real fiery stuff.
Senator Roger Niello (00:51):
Yell and scream.
No, that's not my style.
Evan Meyer (00:54):
That's how you get things done, right?
Yell and scream at each other.
Senator Roger Niello (00:57):
Yeah.
Thanks.
Thanks for having me.
Evan Meyer (01:00):
My pleasure.
My pleasure.
So just to, just to kick it off,you woke up this morning.
I'm sure there's a ton on yourmind about what's going on at
the state level or maybe federallevel.
What's top of mind for you whenyou woke up this morning in all
things politics?
Senator Roger Niello (01:16):
I wake up usually a few times during the
night and things occur to methat I have to get up and write
down so that I can go back tosleep again.
But, we're on recess now, so,uh.
top of mind are things that aregoing on in the district.
I'm meeting with a youngprofessionals group in Roseville
on morning.
So I have to start thinkingabout what I'm gonna say there.
(01:39):
And then we'll be going backinto session week after next and
for the final week of session.
And I have several bills thatare still alive and, i'll be
I'll be thinking more about thatnow.
You mentioned the sixth, SenateDistrict, which of course is my
district.
It's the east side of SacramentoCounty and South Placer County.
(02:02):
And I think it's important forthe viewers to know that we call
this the Jay Leno districtbecause this is the map of my
district.
See Jay Lenos profile in there.
(02:24):
couldn't help.
I had to make sure we sharedthat with the audience.
Evan Meyer (02:28):
Who calls it the Jay Leno district?
Just to be clear.
Senator Roger Niello (02:31):
Well, I showed the map of the district
to a friend of mine when I wasrunning for Senate when I first
saw the map, that didn't evenoccur to me, and she said it was
on an email exchange.
She said, that's the Jay Lenodistrict.
And I looked at it again and Ihad to agree with her.
Evan Meyer (02:49):
Well, Jay Leno, if you're listening to this quick
shout out to you forrepresenting Senator Nilo.
So well.
Senator Roger Niello (02:57):
Right.
Evan Meyer (02:58):
so, tell us, you said a few of these bills are
still alive and, you know, Ithink a lot of a lot of people
don't.
Understand, especially at thestate level, how these things
really work.
So when you say alive, it wasprobably killed at some portion
throughout the process.
(03:19):
There's a long process for abill to become law, which is
actually quite comforting in alot of ways.
But what are those bills?
Where did, where did they getstopped?
What are those bills?
And just tell me a little bitabout that process.
Senator Roger Niello (03:31):
Well, probably the two most important
bills to me, are the the onethat deals with giving small
businesses the right to cure aan a DA Americans with
Disabilities access defect.
Without having been sued by it.
(03:51):
We have a, a, a few predatorylawyers, law law firms in
California that target smallbusinesses threaten to sue, but
say they'll go away for and itthat's, that's what ends up
happening.
So.
And the other one is I think mycommunications director talked
with you about what we call mytitle and summary bill.
(04:14):
And that is a bill that wouldtransfer to the legislative
analyst, the responsibility forwriting title and summary
statements on.
ballot propositions.
Currently it's in the hands ofthe Attorney General, which of
course is a partisan, electedofficial.
And many times they have a biason a particular proposition.
(04:38):
And that bias will show whenthey write the short title and
summary statement.
And unfortunately, a lot ofpeople make up their mind on how
to vote based upon.
The title and summary statementas opposed to the detailed
analysis, which the allegedanalyst writes anyway.
So it'd be no trouble for themto write the title and summary
(05:00):
statement, which would be, amuch less biased statement.
Bill, obviously, democraticleadership does not want to
pass.
Although I've gotten it out ofthe Senate Elections Committee
two times in the last threeyears.
But it gets killed in theAppropriations Committee in a
rather, opaque process, which wecan talk about a little bit
(05:23):
later.
But it died there.
That other bill, which we callthe Right to Cure Bill actually
good example of bipartisancollaboration.
I have half of the Democraticcaucus over half as either joint
authors or co-authors on thatbill, plus my Republican
colleagues.
(05:43):
And it passed overwhelmingly outof the Senate.
that bill, it's not dead.
It's still alive in theassembly.
Judiciary committee because theconsultant of that committee
doesn't like the bill and sothey refuse to give me a
hearing.
So we're gonna work on, continueto work on that next year and
(06:05):
next year.
I will also introduce once againthe title and summary bill.
So those are two that areimportant to me that are not
going forward this year.
But, but I do have four billsthat are on the suspense file in
the assembly appropriationscommittee and three other bills
that are going to the assemblyfloor.
Evan Meyer (06:30):
Just because.
You know, something that caughtme and, and it's so important
'cause I read all thedocumentation in the, in those,
in the booklets about bills.
And I've had a lot of thoughtsof my own about them.
Sometimes it's lacking a lot ofinformation.
Sometimes it's completelybiased, some, and, you know,
(06:52):
having caught this.
Potential for bias is is great.
But you mentioned that, that,that your democratic colleagues
do not support this.
Why is
Senator Roger Niello (07:04):
you mean the title and summary?
Bill?
Evan Meyer (07:06):
Correct
Senator Roger Niello (07:07):
Democratic leadership.
Evan Meyer (07:08):
leadership,
Senator Roger Niello (07:09):
I as I said it is, the bill has passed
out of the Senate ElectionsCommittee two times, once in
2023, Again now in 2025, I thinkit was unanimous.
And a a Democrat is a jointauthor with me on the bill, so
there is support.
(07:29):
the troops, if you will.
But I'm quite sure that theAttorney General is probably
expressing his view on thatcommittee, to Democratic
leadership.
And the way the appropriationscommittee works is bills that
are assigned to appropriations.
And by the way, this bill hasvirtually no fiscal impact.
(07:52):
They say it does, but.
The alleged analyst writes thedetailed analysis for him to
write.
The title and summary statementreally would be no additional
expense, but nonetheless is sentto the appropriations committee.
All bills are put on what'scalled the suspense file.
then bills are voted on to pulloff of the suspense file and
(08:13):
sent to the to the floor.
But bills that are not voted on,just stay on the suspense file
and at the end of the session,they die there.
So there's no fingerprints.
Nobody casts a vote for oragainst those bills.
They just die in the darkness.
That's why I said a few minutesago, it's a very opaque process.
(08:35):
Heavily criticized, butnonetheless, it sticks.
It was that way when I was inthe assembly and it's that way
still, and that's how that billdied.
Evan Meyer (08:48):
And so why do you think he's conveying that
message to democratic leadershipas, as the attorney general?
Senator Roger Niello (08:56):
Well, I don't know that he is, but I
have to strongly suspect becausethere, it's, it's unexplainable
why that bill stays on thesuspense file when it passes
overwhelmingly out of theelections Committee and never
even gets an, gets a vote in theappropriations committee.
Evan Meyer (09:16):
you, you don't really know the answer to why,
which is part of the opa, whichis part of the opaqueness of
what you're
Senator Roger Niello (09:22):
Exactly, but I speculate that the
attorney general is probablyopining in the background
because the bill would take awayhim the ability to editorialize
on title and summary statements.
Evan Meyer (09:35):
Oh boy.
Yeah.
And I guess anytime you
Senator Roger Niello (09:37):
you're,
Evan Meyer (09:38):
yeah.
Senator Roger Niello (09:38):
familiar with this redistricting
proposal.
In California and the governorand the Democratic leadership
want to put a ballot measure onthis coming November for the
voters to vote on actual mapsthat will reduce Republican
seats in Congress outta Let'sjust watch and see.
(10:02):
What that title and summarystatement says when that ballot
proposition goes to the voters,I suspect it will be a highly
statement that will recruitsupport for the proposition as
opposed to being completelyimpartial.
Evan Meyer (10:22):
How come?
How come that's not so obviousin 2025 that it's taken us this
long to see that the thing thatpeople are voting on for the
most part, right?
There's like a how far you gothrough your research to and
spend time to vote.
You could spend months trying tounderstand the problem before
making an educated vote, right?
(10:42):
So this is supposed to.
Help you make a more, aninformed vote in less time in a
lot of ways.
And if you only read, say thesummary or an analysis, you,
you're only getting a piece ofthe puzzle anyway.
Why do you, why do you thinkthat it's not so obvious?
Right.
It's like the first layer oflike transparency and
(11:04):
authenticity in the votingprocess would be right there
where the people open and lookand read this very top line
information and we're still in2025 dealing with like, okay,
someone's editorializing,potentially like, yeah, the most
basic level.
Senator Roger Niello (11:20):
Well, it's not a new issue.
I've been working on this sinceI was in the assembly in I think
it was somewhere around 2008, aconstituent called my office and
suggested this as something thatI ought to work on, and I, I
thought.
That's not a bad idea.
So, I worked on it when I was inthe assembly without success.
(11:41):
Then when I was termed out ofthe assembly, a a state senator
gene Fuller.
Who my chief Assembly, chief ofstaff went to work for.
She worked on it the entire timeshe was there, and then when she
was termed out, Kevin Kiley waselected to the assembly and then
he picked it up and worked on ituntil he ran for Congress and
(12:04):
won.
And that was the same time thatI came back in.
So there have been Republicansworking on this for 15 years.
But again, people are a lot, notenough people are witnessing
what's going on.
and a lot too many people relyon that title and summary
statement.
Maybe a better thing to be wouldbe to just do away with it and
(12:25):
force people to read the detail,which isn't that.
Laborious anyway.
But in any case not enoughpeople have noticed it.
there was a proposition 47,about 10 years ago was a a a
justice reform bill, quoteunquote, called Proposition 47,
(12:45):
which.
Lots of unintended consequencesthat a proposition passed last
November intended to, to fixProposition 36, if you're
familiar with it.
But that original Proposition47, which Kamala Harris as
Attorney General wanted to pass,she gave at the title in summary
statement, the SafeNeighborhoods and Schools Act.
(13:08):
Which was obviously a bias.
So, and that's been talked abouta lot, so maybe people are
becoming more aware of that.
Evan Meyer (13:18):
It's about time
Senator Roger Niello (13:19):
Yeah.
Evan Meyer (13:20):
probably'cause it must be going on through as long
as there's been title andsummary statements, if we're
still dealing with it now.
Senator Roger Niello (13:26):
the Attorney General has had this
responsibility forever.
And there there's a examples ofRepublicans that snuck an
editorial into a title andsummary statement too.
It's just that in the last 25,30 years, the Attorney General
has almost always been ademocrat.
Evan Meyer (13:46):
Yeah, and, and California with such a super
majority it.
Sometimes I think that, youwhatever side you're on there,
there should be an awarenessthat there is a super majority
and that a lot of what peopleare seeing are going to lean in
that direction.
And sometimes, I don't know ifit's clear enough that, you
(14:11):
know, we, we, we pride ourselvesin diversity of thinking.
And of, of people for their, allthe beautiful things that a
diverse population brings to oursociety.
And you know, this is an exampleof diversity, of thinking.
And if you lean too far in onedirection, you're gonna have
problems with not having enoughbalance.
(14:35):
And is it, and that seems fairlyobvious to me as well, whether
you believe in one thing or not.
Part of the system is meant tobalance each other so that
things can operate, it cancoexist well, and you can have
balanced legislation.
Senator Roger Niello (14:49):
And, and I know a lot of Democrats not
necessarily elected officials,although some elected officials
that in private conversationswill share that they do not
think it's healthy to have suchan imbalance in.
In power in the state.
And I, there are signs that itsomebody compared where we are
(15:12):
in California to the midnineties, nationally, when nude
Gingrich and Republicans tookover Congress and it was not
expected, that was a surprise.
And it wasn't because a wholebunch of Democrats Republicans.
It was because a whole bunch ofDemocrats voted Republican
because they didn't like the waythings were going.
(15:32):
And I think it's instructive tonote that president Trump got of
the vote.
In California in the lastelection, which exceeds the
percentage of registeredRepublicans in the state and in
particular made gains with blackand brown voters, particularly
young males.
So, there are some reactionsunfortunately.
(15:56):
Not enough.
There are still people that thatvote based upon the R or the D
next to the name,
Evan Meyer (16:03):
Yeah.
Senator Roger Niello (16:04):
the controllers, last controllers
race is a good example of that.
Chen was the Republicancandidate.
Eminently qualified, a brilliantguy, and he received the
endorsement of every majornewspaper in the state, every
one.
But he still because too manypeople voted.
(16:25):
Democrat that were Democratsvoted Democrat, although there
were a lot that switched becausehe did receive more votes than
any other statewide Republicanrunning.
But he didn't win and he reallyshould have.
Evan Meyer (16:38):
Yeah.
Yeah.
I meet a lot of people that voteD down the line, or r down the
line.
And I think that, I do alsothink that's unhealthy and it
doesn't, it doesn't allow forcritical thinking either.
It doesn't let you think, youknow, if you understand people
have to put a D or an R and alot of people feel differently
just'cause you have that, youmay feel like you're a D in some
(16:58):
ways or an R in other ways.
and it doesn't allow for nuance.
And that I, this is somethingI've been sort of fighting for
for so long in civics, is likethe ability to understand.
There's nuance.
It's not all or nothing all thetime, just'cause you read a
thing in headlines and you thinkthat everyone fits into this
category and I hope we could dobetter.
Senator Roger Niello (17:19):
And, and that.
That gets back to civicseducation in the K through 12
system, which has been franklylacking.
I worked with a, the countysuperintendent of education here
in Sacramento County along witha judge and a former.
district superintendent and totry to convince our school
districts here to include civicseducation throughout the K
(17:43):
through 12 spectrum, which everydistrict in the in the county
adopted a resolution with theexception of one.
And then the pandemic hit.
So it sort of hurt thatprogress, but we could do a much
better job.
Teaching civics and civicengagement.
Engagement is really important.
(18:04):
Every time we come up with a, aproposition to make it easier
for people to register to voteand easier for people to vote, I
always say, well, that's fine,but what we need to do is make
sure that we have educated andengaged more educated and
engaged voters.
And that's what's reallyimportant in a, in a, in a
democracy.
Evan Meyer (18:25):
Right?
Yeah, there is, there is.
The argument is what's, what'sworse?
Someone not voting or being anuneducated voter.
I've heard that line before.
I think that's a philosophicalquestion.
It could probably go back andforth for a long time, but it is
an, it is an outstandingquestion, and I don't know if we
do a, a, a good enough job at,at, at getting people to think
(18:49):
through how they would solve aproblem in the right way of
going about solving it.
It's a, it's, it's, it'slacking.
Senator Roger Niello (18:56):
I, I think our education of civics
academically as well as civicengagement could be much better.
Evan Meyer (19:05):
Yeah.
So you've been let's, let'sdirect this sentiment and
conversation towards Californiabudgeting with taking all that
we just talked about and, and,and.
Figuring out, you know, thatyou've had such a strong focus
on budget, in the, in thelegislature.
(19:27):
What, what is your assessmentright now of the current budget
challenges in California?
Senator Roger Niello (19:33):
down.
We had tremendous surpluses acouple years I was elected they
were essentially spent I thinkwe.
Need a much more disciplinedapproach toward establishing
reserves.
And I can talk about my thoughton that in a moment.
But we developed significantdeficits.
(19:54):
And the good news is the statestill has a relatively healthy
cash position and this year'sbudget had a deficit, we had to
meet that is.
Established spending programsthat exceeded expected revenues
by about$12 billion.
that's a lot of money, but thatcan be that gap can be closed
(20:17):
through a number of issues thatavoid too much in the way of
expense reductions.
But the problem is thatprojecting the same situation
out.
two to four years, we're gonnabe looking at 20 to$30 billion
deficits and and, and, andclimbing revenues come back in
line with, with establishedspending programs.
(20:40):
That's why it's called astructural deficit, and we're
not doing enough now toidentify.
Programs that aren't working, aswell as was expected when they
were started so as to cut backor reduce those programs because
we're gonna have significantbudget challenges headed into
the fiscal year after this oneand the next two or three after
(21:02):
that.
And what's frustrating is Idon't see that the leadership,
which really has control becausethey have a super majority my my
weapon is my mouth.
And I'm not always totally,listened to.
So, that's that's frustratingand we have challenges.
Evan Meyer (21:21):
So when you're in these committee meetings, which
is a mix of Democrats andRepublicans, and you're talking
about budget.
Do these, do these things comeup?
Does this conversation come upin those, in those committee
meetings?
Do you express these thoughts?
Does, does, does it feel likeyou're at least somewhat hopeful
(21:42):
about some of the work that'sbeing done there?
Senator Roger Niello (21:45):
there's two things that I bring up.
I said one time that I apologizefor being a broken record.
And another member of thelegislature who I worked with on
the budget committee in theassembly, walked up to me after
I said that and he said giventhe age of people here, I
suspect most people don't knowwhat a broken record is,
Evan Meyer (22:11):
That's a funny joke to tell in a situation like
that, I think.
Right?
Yeah.
Senator Roger Niello (22:15):
but I always try to use humor along
with my serious points, butthere are two things that I
continually bring up.
One is that, which I justmentioned, and I can't say that
it elicits a detailed discussionof the issue but I get the point
out.
Uh, the other thing is that the,the essential final budget
(22:38):
package, irrespective of all thecommittee meetings that we have,
both the subcommittee meetings,which are.
There's subcommittees forvarious subjects of the, of the
budget and then the full budgetcommittee meeting.
We do have those committeemeetings, but essentially the
final budget is developedthrough a meeting, door
(23:00):
meetings, between the presidentpro tem, the speaker of the
assembly, and the governor.
other words, three Democrats.
And that is a also a somewhatopaque process.
And I continually speak to thatissue also.
So those are the primary thingsthat I talk about.
And being a member of the superminority my impact just depends
(23:23):
on how people react to it.
But it doesn't I don't sensethat it moves the needle all
that much.
Evan Meyer (23:30):
Do you think your democratic colleagues would
agree that the process isopaque?
Senator Roger Niello (23:35):
Yes, I do.
They're not gonna admit it, butI think a lot of them agree with
that because remember Imentioned just three people.
Rest of the Democrats, by andlarge, maybe the maybe the
budget shares in the assemblyand the and the Senate and maybe
a few others in leadership.
But of the rank and fileDemocrats in the Assembly and
(23:57):
the Senate are not involved inthose behind the door,
conversations.
So yes, I would suspect that thefrustration goes beyond my
caucus.
Evan Meyer (24:10):
You've put forward the title and summary Bill?
Is there any other legislationthat has been put forth to
address the opaqueness?
And do you wish there was somele additional legislation to
address this?
What, what, how would you seethis moving in a better
direction?
And, and improving over, overtime.
(24:31):
Obviously you can't fix thisovernight, but like what, what
can we do in addition to yourbill to start fixing.
Senator Roger Niello (24:41):
most of the process that is less than
transparent, transparent is.
Process.
It's not legislated, it'spractice.
And so, the answer to that wouldbe the the hypothetical
rhetorical question, if I wereking.
what would I do?
And I, I would seek to improveall of these things.
(25:02):
I've said time and again withregard to the title and summary
legislation.
a Republican was continuallyAttorney General, I would still
support this legislation becauseit makes sense.
And if Republicans all of asudden gained control.
Would we change the suspenseprocess in the appropriations
(25:23):
committee?
I would argue that we shouldwould we open up those behind
closed door meetings?
I would argue that we should I'dhave to wait and see if the rest
of my Republicans colleague,agreed, colleagues agreed with
that if we regained control.
But again, those are processissues that really can't be
fixed via legislation.
(25:46):
Well, I
Evan Meyer (25:47):
Yeah.
Senator Roger Niello (25:47):
they can't, but if it's the way the
majority party wants it alegislative approach wouldn't
succeed.
Evan Meyer (25:54):
Hmm.
Interesting.
That's interesting.
You know, it's, it's, if youlook at the chart of how often
of, of flipping from Democrat toRepublican and vice versa, it's
about, it's almost that time, ifnot that time right now.
I forget the exact chart, but itflips right when there, there's
(26:14):
been, I don't wanna say 30 or 40years ago, it was Republican and
then 30 or 40 years before thatit was Democrat.
And this, the, the, the, the,the polls.
Switch and the fee, thesentiment of what someone would
normally be a Democrat is,becomes Republican and sort of
vice versa.
This happens every severaldecades.
(26:35):
It's happened a number of timesin California.
Do you think that shift is onits way?
Or will it take longer thistime, but, or, or will it never
happen again?
Which to me seems unlikelybecause things.
Cycle.
So I'm just, where do you feelabout that?
Senator Roger Niello (26:53):
Well, first of all, I never believe in
never,
Evan Meyer (26:57):
neither.
Senator Roger Niello (26:58):
I have to look at this on a couple of
different levels.
One is I mentioned before thatpresident Trump received 40% of
the vote, which exceeds thepercentage of Republican
registrations, and made inroadsamong particularly young men of
color which illustrates perhapsa trend in the direction that
(27:19):
you state, There aredemographic, migration.
There's demographic mi migrationthat's going on.
If you look back to the end ofthe Cold War, industry was very
large in California.
is early 1990s, right.
(27:42):
And Texas was a democraticstate.
California was a Republicanstate, and the people, mostly
Southern California, people thatwere in the defense industry
moved out of the state.
I believe a lot of'em moved toTexas.
Texas and Arizona.
Arizona, I think was a a leaningblue state back then also Texas
(28:06):
and Arizona, became Republicanstates and California gradually
became democratic.
And so, it isn't just a matterof shifting.
Attitudes because maybe onesuper majority party goes a
little too far in some areas.
It's also the migration ofpeople, and we have had.
(28:28):
A larger out migration fromCalifornia than an in migration.
And it appears that it's mostly,Republicans moving out.
Whether that means Republicansmoving in or not I don't know.
But there are a lot ofRepublicans who have become
frustrated with the supermajority and they've moved to
(28:49):
Tennessee, to Texas areas like
Evan Meyer (28:51):
Yes.
Senator Roger Niello (28:52):
In fact, I've heard some people in
Tennessee complain thatCalifornians moving there is
making the place moreconservative.
so, we have the a, the, we havethe attitudinal changes, but we
also have the demographic,partisan net out migration that
it can affect things too.
So I, I submit all of that, thatI will wrap up in a bow by
(29:14):
saying, don't know.
Evan Meyer (29:20):
Well presented, well wrapped, and I also enjoy the
bow.
Senator Roger Niello (29:26):
Well also the wrapping paper is kind of
gray.
Evan Meyer (29:30):
Oh yeah.
Like most things, that is ametaphor for life.
The gray area, things are notblack and white.
There's nuance to everything.
Senator Roger Niello (29:39):
Yep.
Evan Meyer (29:40):
Critical thinking is required.
Senator Roger Niello (29:42):
Yes.
Evan Meyer (29:44):
Okay.
I think our last question fortoday, because I wish I can do
this for two or three hours withyou, but that's not possible.
So ai, how is this beingdiscussed in the legislature
(30:05):
from.
Well first, how is it impactingthe operations day to day, but
also where do you see it goingin the future, specifically
around the legislature, thelegislative process, and
legislative operations?
I.
Senator Roger Niello (30:20):
Well, in the legislature, the issue is
how do you regulate it?
I have said many times I have alot of very talented, very smart
colleagues, but frankly, we have120 people here, 80 in the
assembly, 40 in the Senate, whowere probably the least.
(30:42):
competent people to fullyunderstand artificial
intelligence and how to regulateit.
I have not carried anyartificial intelligence
legislation myself I believe.
So as not to discourageinnovation if we're going to
regulate it, we should regulatewhat it does, not how it's
(31:04):
developed, and some of thelegislative, efforts get into
that latter area.
And I think that controls it toomuch.
But artificial intelligence isgoing to have a significant and
profound effect on, on our econeconomy, on social issues, in,
in all sorts of ways.
(31:25):
I think the job loss issue isprobably overblown because we
have had continual.
Technological advances,especially over the last 150
years, that in human history isunprecedented.
and in the western world it hasdone nothing but vastly improve
(31:47):
and expand our economy.
And I have a hard time believingthat our artificial intelligence
will be any better and.
people that lament job losses toartificial intelligence.
I say, and I didn't author this,I heard it from somebody else,
so, I forget who, but it's, Ibelieve it's true.
You will not lose your job toartificial intelligence.
(32:10):
You will lose your job tosomebody who knows how to use
artificial intelligence.
Evan Meyer (32:16):
I like that.
Senator Roger Niello (32:16):
incredibly valuable tool.
I use it myself for, researchpurposes.
There's several differentplatforms and it is a powerful
tool that people should learnhow to use.
It will help businesses becomemore productive again.
People won't lose their job toartificial intelligence per se,
but to people who know how touse it
Evan Meyer (32:38):
Right.
Senator Roger Niello (32:38):
I'm the eternal optimist and I think
it'll be like all of the othertechnical in innovations that
we've had.
Especially in the last 150 yearsand things will be better, but
we do have to be careful.
There can be there can benegative consequences.
Evan Meyer (32:56):
Yeah.
You know, it's funny when everytime there's like a big thing
that's gonna disrupt something.
There's always some, and this isa big one, I don't want to
discount how big AI is, right?
It's as big as, at least as bigas, you know, it's the
industrial revolution or theinvention of the, you know, the
internet or.
Whatever, you know, agriculturalrevolution, the printing press,
(33:18):
the steam engine, whatever,right?
Like I, it's, it's that big andit's touching everything.
And you say to yourself, well,you know, part of, I remember
like when music sharing,peer-to-peer, Napster was the
big thing.
And then at some point you sayto yourself, look, free and
productivity.
Beat Trump.
All things that are free, thatyou can get for free if it can
(33:39):
be for free.
And things that are, that are,or almost free, we'll say, or,
or things that are radicallyproductive to make your day
easier, to give you moreinformation to help be more
productive, as in your work, inyour line of work, whatever that
just trumps off.
It is what it is.
It's not going anywhere.
You can fight it all you want.
You could say, oh, what are wegonna do?
We're all gonna lose our jobs.
(34:00):
Well.
You, you may lose your jobbecause you're not embracing
what just is.
I I can't change it.
It's just coming because,because it's productive and it's
just about free.
Senator Roger Niello (34:13):
Learn how to use it and how it can be
productive in your own life,both personally and from a
business perspective.
Evan Meyer (34:25):
That's it.
That's it.
Well, I very much enjoyed thisconversation.
I'm grateful for your time, yourexpertise and and for sharing
what you have here today.
And this was wonderful.
Thanks so much again.
And any last words you wanna sayto the world?
Senator Roger Niello (34:45):
The world.
Evan Meyer (34:48):
Communicate your last line of the world.
What do you wanna see for thewhole world?
I.
Senator Roger Niello (34:53):
I wanna see peace.
I'm troubled by things that aregoing on around the world, and
I, I want to see peace.
And I'd like to see a betterbalance of power in California.
We'll see how the 2026 electionturns out on that score in in
California.
And I'm up for reelection.
(35:13):
It'll be my last one.
I'll be turned out of the afterthat, but I'll be hopeful for, a
little bit better balance ofpartisan power in the California
state legislature.
And I've enjoyed this too.
And I'm glad that you reachedout to me for something that had
absolutely nothing whatsoever todo with your podcast, but here
we end up on your podcast.
(35:34):
So I thank you for that.
Evan Meyer (35:37):
It.
This was great.
Have a a lovely day.
We're on different time zones,so have a wonderful day and
we'll connect soon.
Senator Roger Niello (35:45):
Okay,
Evan Meyer (35:46):
All right.
Welcome to Meyer Side Chats, the podcast where
leadership, innovation, andgovernance meets solutions
oriented thinking and civildiscourse to shape better
communities.
Today I am honored to be joinedby California State Senator
Roger Nelo.
Senator Nelo represents thesixth Senate district and brings
decades of public service andbusiness experience to
(00:22):
Sacramento.
He's currently the vice chair ofSenate budget Committee amongst
a bunch of committees, actually.
And, and he is been aconsistent, a advocate for
fiscal responsibility,structural reform, and pragmatic
governance.
Senator, thank you for joiningus today.
Senator Roger Niello (00:39):
Well, thanks for having me.
But you start out saying acivil, I've gotta be civil.
Evan Meyer (00:45):
Oh, well, you know, if we want more clicks, we might
as well make this heated andcontravertial Let's get into
real fiery stuff.
Senator Roger Niello (00:51):
Yell and scream.
No, that's not my style.
Evan Meyer (00:54):
That's how you get things done, right?
Yell and scream at each other.
Senator Roger Niello (00:57):
Yeah.
Thanks.
Thanks for having me.
Evan Meyer (01:00):
My pleasure.
My pleasure.
So just to, just to kick it off,you woke up this morning.
I'm sure there's a ton on yourmind about what's going on at
the state level or maybe federallevel.
What's top of mind for you whenyou woke up this morning in all
things politics?
Senator Roger Niello (01:16):
I wake up usually a few times during the
night and things occur to methat I have to get up and write
down so that I can go back tosleep again.
But, we're on recess now, so,uh.
top of mind are things that aregoing on in the district.
I'm meeting with a youngprofessionals group in Roseville
on morning.
So I have to start thinkingabout what I'm gonna say there.
(01:39):
And then we'll be going backinto session week after next and
for the final week of session.
And I have several bills thatare still alive and, i'll be
I'll be thinking more about thatnow.
You mentioned the sixth, SenateDistrict, which of course is my
district.
It's the east side of SacramentoCounty and South Placer County.
(02:02):
And I think it's important forthe viewers to know that we call
this the Jay Leno districtbecause this is the map of my
district.
See Jay Lenos profile in there.
(02:24):
couldn't help.
I had to make sure we sharedthat with the audience.
Evan Meyer (02:28):
Who calls it the Jay Leno district?
Just to be clear.
Senator Roger Niello (02:31):
Well, I showed the map of the district
to a friend of mine when I wasrunning for Senate when I first
saw the map, that didn't evenoccur to me, and she said it was
on an email exchange.
She said, that's the Jay Lenodistrict.
And I looked at it again and Ihad to agree with her.
Evan Meyer (02:49):
Well, Jay Leno, if you're listening to this quick
shout out to you forrepresenting Senator Nilo.
So well.
Senator Roger Niello (02:57):
Right.
Evan Meyer (02:58):
so, tell us, you said a few of these bills are
still alive and, you know, Ithink a lot of a lot of people
don't.
Understand, especially at thestate level, how these things
really work.
So when you say alive, it wasprobably killed at some portion
throughout the process.
(03:19):
There's a long process for abill to become law, which is
actually quite comforting in alot of ways.
But what are those bills?
Where did, where did they getstopped?
What are those bills?
And just tell me a little bitabout that process.
Senator Roger Niello (03:31):
Well, probably the two most important
bills to me, are the the onethat deals with giving small
businesses the right to cure aan a DA Americans with
Disabilities access defect.
Without having been sued by it.
(03:51):
We have a, a, a few predatorylawyers, law law firms in
California that target smallbusinesses threaten to sue, but
say they'll go away for and itthat's, that's what ends up
happening.
So.
And the other one is I think mycommunications director talked
with you about what we call mytitle and summary bill.
(04:14):
And that is a bill that wouldtransfer to the legislative
analyst, the responsibility forwriting title and summary
statements on.
ballot propositions.
Currently it's in the hands ofthe Attorney General, which of
course is a partisan, electedofficial.
And many times they have a biason a particular proposition.
(04:38):
And that bias will show whenthey write the short title and
summary statement.
And unfortunately, a lot ofpeople make up their mind on how
to vote based upon.
The title and summary statementas opposed to the detailed
analysis, which the allegedanalyst writes anyway.
So it'd be no trouble for themto write the title and summary
(05:00):
statement, which would be, amuch less biased statement.
Bill, obviously, democraticleadership does not want to
pass.
Although I've gotten it out ofthe Senate Elections Committee
two times in the last threeyears.
But it gets killed in theAppropriations Committee in a
rather, opaque process, which wecan talk about a little bit
(05:23):
later.
But it died there.
That other bill, which we callthe Right to Cure Bill actually
good example of bipartisancollaboration.
I have half of the Democraticcaucus over half as either joint
authors or co-authors on thatbill, plus my Republican
colleagues.
(05:43):
And it passed overwhelmingly outof the Senate.
that bill, it's not dead.
It's still alive in theassembly.
Judiciary committee because theconsultant of that committee
doesn't like the bill and sothey refuse to give me a
hearing.
So we're gonna work on, continueto work on that next year and
(06:05):
next year.
I will also introduce once againthe title and summary bill.
So those are two that areimportant to me that are not
going forward this year.
But, but I do have four billsthat are on the suspense file in
the assembly appropriationscommittee and three other bills
that are going to the assemblyfloor.
Evan Meyer (06:30):
Just because.
You know, something that caughtme and, and it's so important
'cause I read all thedocumentation in the, in those,
in the booklets about bills.
And I've had a lot of thoughtsof my own about them.
Sometimes it's lacking a lot ofinformation.
Sometimes it's completelybiased, some, and, you know,
(06:52):
having caught this.
Potential for bias is is great.
But you mentioned that, that,that your democratic colleagues
do not support this.
Why is
Senator Roger Niello (07:04):
you mean the title and summary?
Bill?
Evan Meyer (07:06):
Correct
Senator Roger Niello (07:07):
Democratic leadership.
Evan Meyer (07:08):
leadership,
Senator Roger Niello (07:09):
I as I said it is, the bill has passed
out of the Senate ElectionsCommittee two times, once in
2023, Again now in 2025, I thinkit was unanimous.
And a a Democrat is a jointauthor with me on the bill, so
there is support.
(07:29):
the troops, if you will.
But I'm quite sure that theAttorney General is probably
expressing his view on thatcommittee, to Democratic
leadership.
And the way the appropriationscommittee works is bills that
are assigned to appropriations.
And by the way, this bill hasvirtually no fiscal impact.
(07:52):
They say it does, but.
The alleged analyst writes thedetailed analysis for him to
write.
The title and summary statementreally would be no additional
expense, but nonetheless is sentto the appropriations committee.
All bills are put on what'scalled the suspense file.
then bills are voted on to pulloff of the suspense file and
(08:13):
sent to the to the floor.
But bills that are not voted on,just stay on the suspense file
and at the end of the session,they die there.
So there's no fingerprints.
Nobody casts a vote for oragainst those bills.
They just die in the darkness.
That's why I said a few minutesago, it's a very opaque process.
(08:35):
Heavily criticized, butnonetheless, it sticks.
It was that way when I was inthe assembly and it's that way
still, and that's how that billdied.
Evan Meyer (08:48):
And so why do you think he's conveying that
message to democratic leadershipas, as the attorney general?
Senator Roger Niello (08:56):
Well, I don't know that he is, but I
have to strongly suspect becausethere, it's, it's unexplainable
why that bill stays on thesuspense file when it passes
overwhelmingly out of theelections Committee and never
even gets an, gets a vote in theappropriations committee.
Evan Meyer (09:16):
you, you don't really know the answer to why,
which is part of the opa, whichis part of the opaqueness of
what you're
Senator Roger Niello (09:22):
Exactly, but I speculate that the
attorney general is probablyopining in the background
because the bill would take awayhim the ability to editorialize
on title and summary statements.
Evan Meyer (09:35):
Oh boy.
Yeah.
And I guess anytime you
Senator Roger Niello (09:37):
you're,
Evan Meyer (09:38):
yeah.
Senator Roger Niello (09:38):
familiar with this redistricting
proposal.
In California and the governorand the Democratic leadership
want to put a ballot measure onthis coming November for the
voters to vote on actual mapsthat will reduce Republican
seats in Congress outta Let'sjust watch and see.
(10:02):
What that title and summarystatement says when that ballot
proposition goes to the voters,I suspect it will be a highly
statement that will recruitsupport for the proposition as
opposed to being completelyimpartial.
Evan Meyer (10:22):
How come?
How come that's not so obviousin 2025 that it's taken us this
long to see that the thing thatpeople are voting on for the
most part, right?
There's like a how far you gothrough your research to and
spend time to vote.
You could spend months trying tounderstand the problem before
making an educated vote, right?
(10:42):
So this is supposed to.
Help you make a more, aninformed vote in less time in a
lot of ways.
And if you only read, say thesummary or an analysis, you,
you're only getting a piece ofthe puzzle anyway.
Why do you, why do you thinkthat it's not so obvious?
Right.
It's like the first layer oflike transparency and
(11:04):
authenticity in the votingprocess would be right there
where the people open and lookand read this very top line
information and we're still in2025 dealing with like, okay,
someone's editorializing,potentially like, yeah, the most
basic level.
Senator Roger Niello (11:20):
Well, it's not a new issue.
I've been working on this sinceI was in the assembly in I think
it was somewhere around 2008, aconstituent called my office and
suggested this as something thatI ought to work on, and I, I
thought.
That's not a bad idea.
So, I worked on it when I was inthe assembly without success.
(11:41):
Then when I was termed out ofthe assembly, a a state senator
gene Fuller.
Who my chief Assembly, chief ofstaff went to work for.
She worked on it the entire timeshe was there, and then when she
was termed out, Kevin Kiley waselected to the assembly and then
he picked it up and worked on ituntil he ran for Congress and
(12:04):
won.
And that was the same time thatI came back in.
So there have been Republicansworking on this for 15 years.
But again, people are a lot, notenough people are witnessing
what's going on.
and a lot too many people relyon that title and summary
statement.
Maybe a better thing to be wouldbe to just do away with it and
(12:25):
force people to read the detail,which isn't that.
Laborious anyway.
But in any case not enoughpeople have noticed it.
there was a proposition 47,about 10 years ago was a a a
justice reform bill, quoteunquote, called Proposition 47,
(12:45):
which.
Lots of unintended consequencesthat a proposition passed last
November intended to, to fixProposition 36, if you're
familiar with it.
But that original Proposition47, which Kamala Harris as
Attorney General wanted to pass,she gave at the title in summary
statement, the SafeNeighborhoods and Schools Act.
(13:08):
Which was obviously a bias.
So, and that's been talked abouta lot, so maybe people are
becoming more aware of that.
Evan Meyer (13:18):
It's about time
Senator Roger Niello (13:19):
Yeah.
Evan Meyer (13:20):
probably'cause it must be going on through as long
as there's been title andsummary statements, if we're
still dealing with it now.
Senator Roger Niello (13:26):
the Attorney General has had this
responsibility forever.
And there there's a examples ofRepublicans that snuck an
editorial into a title andsummary statement too.
It's just that in the last 25,30 years, the Attorney General
has almost always been ademocrat.
Evan Meyer (13:46):
Yeah, and, and California with such a super
majority it.
Sometimes I think that, youwhatever side you're on there,
there should be an awarenessthat there is a super majority
and that a lot of what peopleare seeing are going to lean in
that direction.
And sometimes, I don't know ifit's clear enough that, you
(14:11):
know, we, we, we pride ourselvesin diversity of thinking.
And of, of people for their, allthe beautiful things that a
diverse population brings to oursociety.
And you know, this is an exampleof diversity, of thinking.
And if you lean too far in onedirection, you're gonna have
problems with not having enoughbalance.
(14:35):
And is it, and that seems fairlyobvious to me as well, whether
you believe in one thing or not.
Part of the system is meant tobalance each other so that
things can operate, it cancoexist well, and you can have
balanced legislation.
Senator Roger Niello (14:49):
And, and I know a lot of Democrats not
necessarily elected officials,although some elected officials
that in private conversationswill share that they do not
think it's healthy to have suchan imbalance in.
In power in the state.
And I, there are signs that itsomebody compared where we are
(15:12):
in California to the midnineties, nationally, when nude
Gingrich and Republicans tookover Congress and it was not
expected, that was a surprise.
And it wasn't because a wholebunch of Democrats Republicans.
It was because a whole bunch ofDemocrats voted Republican
because they didn't like the waythings were going.
(15:32):
And I think it's instructive tonote that president Trump got of
the vote.
In California in the lastelection, which exceeds the
percentage of registeredRepublicans in the state and in
particular made gains with blackand brown voters, particularly
young males.
So, there are some reactionsunfortunately.
(15:56):
Not enough.
There are still people that thatvote based upon the R or the D
next to the name,
Evan Meyer (16:03):
Yeah.
Senator Roger Niello (16:04):
the controllers, last controllers
race is a good example of that.
Chen was the Republicancandidate.
Eminently qualified, a brilliantguy, and he received the
endorsement of every majornewspaper in the state, every
one.
But he still because too manypeople voted.
(16:25):
Democrat that were Democratsvoted Democrat, although there
were a lot that switched becausehe did receive more votes than
any other statewide Republicanrunning.
But he didn't win and he reallyshould have.
Evan Meyer (16:38):
Yeah.
Yeah.
I meet a lot of people that voteD down the line, or r down the
line.
And I think that, I do alsothink that's unhealthy and it
doesn't, it doesn't allow forcritical thinking either.
It doesn't let you think, youknow, if you understand people
have to put a D or an R and alot of people feel differently
just'cause you have that, youmay feel like you're a D in some
(16:58):
ways or an R in other ways.
and it doesn't allow for nuance.
And that I, this is somethingI've been sort of fighting for
for so long in civics, is likethe ability to understand.
There's nuance.
It's not all or nothing all thetime, just'cause you read a
thing in headlines and you thinkthat everyone fits into this
category and I hope we could dobetter.
Senator Roger Niello (17:19):
And, and that.
That gets back to civicseducation in the K through 12
system, which has been franklylacking.
I worked with a, the countysuperintendent of education here
in Sacramento County along witha judge and a former.
district superintendent and totry to convince our school
districts here to include civicseducation throughout the K
(17:43):
through 12 spectrum, which everydistrict in the in the county
adopted a resolution with theexception of one.
And then the pandemic hit.
So it sort of hurt thatprogress, but we could do a much
better job.
Teaching civics and civicengagement.
Engagement is really important.
(18:04):
Every time we come up with a, aproposition to make it easier
for people to register to voteand easier for people to vote, I
always say, well, that's fine,but what we need to do is make
sure that we have educated andengaged more educated and
engaged voters.
And that's what's reallyimportant in a, in a, in a
democracy.
Evan Meyer (18:25):
Right?
Yeah, there is, there is.
The argument is what's, what'sworse?
Someone not voting or being anuneducated voter.
I've heard that line before.
I think that's a philosophicalquestion.
It could probably go back andforth for a long time, but it is
an, it is an outstandingquestion, and I don't know if we
do a, a, a good enough job at,at, at getting people to think
(18:49):
through how they would solve aproblem in the right way of
going about solving it.
It's a, it's, it's, it'slacking.
Senator Roger Niello (18:56):
I, I think our education of civics
academically as well as civicengagement could be much better.
Evan Meyer (19:05):
Yeah.
So you've been let's, let'sdirect this sentiment and
conversation towards Californiabudgeting with taking all that
we just talked about and, and,and.
Figuring out, you know, thatyou've had such a strong focus
on budget, in the, in thelegislature.
(19:27):
What, what is your assessmentright now of the current budget
challenges in California?
Senator Roger Niello (19:33):
down.
We had tremendous surpluses acouple years I was elected they
were essentially spent I thinkwe.
Need a much more disciplinedapproach toward establishing
reserves.
And I can talk about my thoughton that in a moment.
But we developed significantdeficits.
(19:54):
And the good news is the statestill has a relatively healthy
cash position and this year'sbudget had a deficit, we had to
meet that is.
Established spending programsthat exceeded expected revenues
by about$12 billion.
that's a lot of money, but thatcan be that gap can be closed
(20:17):
through a number of issues thatavoid too much in the way of
expense reductions.
But the problem is thatprojecting the same situation
out.
two to four years, we're gonnabe looking at 20 to$30 billion
deficits and and, and, andclimbing revenues come back in
line with, with establishedspending programs.
(20:40):
That's why it's called astructural deficit, and we're
not doing enough now toidentify.
Programs that aren't working, aswell as was expected when they
were started so as to cut backor reduce those programs because
we're gonna have significantbudget challenges headed into
the fiscal year after this oneand the next two or three after
(21:02):
that.
And what's frustrating is Idon't see that the leadership,
which really has control becausethey have a super majority my my
weapon is my mouth.
And I'm not always totally,listened to.
So, that's that's frustratingand we have challenges.
Evan Meyer (21:21):
So when you're in these committee meetings, which
is a mix of Democrats andRepublicans, and you're talking
about budget.
Do these, do these things comeup?
Does this conversation come upin those, in those committee
meetings?
Do you express these thoughts?
Does, does, does it feel likeyou're at least somewhat hopeful
(21:42):
about some of the work that'sbeing done there?
Senator Roger Niello (21:45):
there's two things that I bring up.
I said one time that I apologizefor being a broken record.
And another member of thelegislature who I worked with on
the budget committee in theassembly, walked up to me after
I said that and he said giventhe age of people here, I
suspect most people don't knowwhat a broken record is,
Evan Meyer (22:11):
That's a funny joke to tell in a situation like
that, I think.
Right?
Yeah.
Senator Roger Niello (22:15):
but I always try to use humor along
with my serious points, butthere are two things that I
continually bring up.
One is that, which I justmentioned, and I can't say that
it elicits a detailed discussionof the issue but I get the point
out.
Uh, the other thing is that the,the essential final budget
(22:38):
package, irrespective of all thecommittee meetings that we have,
both the subcommittee meetings,which are.
There's subcommittees forvarious subjects of the, of the
budget and then the full budgetcommittee meeting.
We do have those committeemeetings, but essentially the
final budget is developedthrough a meeting, door
(23:00):
meetings, between the presidentpro tem, the speaker of the
assembly, and the governor.
other words, three Democrats.
And that is a also a somewhatopaque process.
And I continually speak to thatissue also.
So those are the primary thingsthat I talk about.
And being a member of the superminority my impact just depends
(23:23):
on how people react to it.
But it doesn't I don't sensethat it moves the needle all
that much.
Evan Meyer (23:30):
Do you think your democratic colleagues would
agree that the process isopaque?
Senator Roger Niello (23:35):
Yes, I do.
They're not gonna admit it, butI think a lot of them agree with
that because remember Imentioned just three people.
Rest of the Democrats, by andlarge, maybe the maybe the
budget shares in the assemblyand the and the Senate and maybe
a few others in leadership.
But of the rank and fileDemocrats in the Assembly and
(23:57):
the Senate are not involved inthose behind the door,
conversations.
So yes, I would suspect that thefrustration goes beyond my
caucus.
Evan Meyer (24:10):
You've put forward the title and summary Bill?
Is there any other legislationthat has been put forth to
address the opaqueness?
And do you wish there was somele additional legislation to
address this?
What, what, how would you seethis moving in a better
direction?
And, and improving over, overtime.
(24:31):
Obviously you can't fix thisovernight, but like what, what
can we do in addition to yourbill to start fixing.
Senator Roger Niello (24:41):
most of the process that is less than
transparent, transparent is.
Process.
It's not legislated, it'spractice.
And so, the answer to that wouldbe the the hypothetical
rhetorical question, if I wereking.
what would I do?
And I, I would seek to improveall of these things.
(25:02):
I've said time and again withregard to the title and summary
legislation.
a Republican was continuallyAttorney General, I would still
support this legislation becauseit makes sense.
And if Republicans all of asudden gained control.
Would we change the suspenseprocess in the appropriations
(25:23):
committee?
I would argue that we shouldwould we open up those behind
closed door meetings?
I would argue that we should I'dhave to wait and see if the rest
of my Republicans colleague,agreed, colleagues agreed with
that if we regained control.
But again, those are processissues that really can't be
fixed via legislation.
(25:46):
Well, I
Evan Meyer (25:47):
Yeah.
Senator Roger Niello (25:47):
they can't, but if it's the way the
majority party wants it alegislative approach wouldn't
succeed.
Evan Meyer (25:54):
Hmm.
Interesting.
That's interesting.
You know, it's, it's, if youlook at the chart of how often
of, of flipping from Democrat toRepublican and vice versa, it's
about, it's almost that time, ifnot that time right now.
I forget the exact chart, but itflips right when there, there's
(26:14):
been, I don't wanna say 30 or 40years ago, it was Republican and
then 30 or 40 years before thatit was Democrat.
And this, the, the, the, the,the polls.
Switch and the fee, thesentiment of what someone would
normally be a Democrat is,becomes Republican and sort of
vice versa.
This happens every severaldecades.
(26:35):
It's happened a number of timesin California.
Do you think that shift is onits way?
Or will it take longer thistime, but, or, or will it never
happen again?
Which to me seems unlikelybecause things.
Cycle.
So I'm just, where do you feelabout that?
Senator Roger Niello (26:53):
Well, first of all, I never believe in
never,
Evan Meyer (26:57):
neither.
Senator Roger Niello (26:58):
I have to look at this on a couple of
different levels.
One is I mentioned before thatpresident Trump received 40% of
the vote, which exceeds thepercentage of Republican
registrations, and made inroadsamong particularly young men of
color which illustrates perhapsa trend in the direction that
(27:19):
you state, There aredemographic, migration.
There's demographic mi migrationthat's going on.
If you look back to the end ofthe Cold War, industry was very
large in California.
is early 1990s, right.
(27:42):
And Texas was a democraticstate.
California was a Republicanstate, and the people, mostly
Southern California, people thatwere in the defense industry
moved out of the state.
I believe a lot of'em moved toTexas.
Texas and Arizona.
Arizona, I think was a a leaningblue state back then also Texas
(28:06):
and Arizona, became Republicanstates and California gradually
became democratic.
And so, it isn't just a matterof shifting.
Attitudes because maybe onesuper majority party goes a
little too far in some areas.
It's also the migration ofpeople, and we have had.
(28:28):
A larger out migration fromCalifornia than an in migration.
And it appears that it's mostly,Republicans moving out.
Whether that means Republicansmoving in or not I don't know.
But there are a lot ofRepublicans who have become
frustrated with the supermajority and they've moved to
(28:49):
Tennessee, to Texas areas like
Evan Meyer (28:51):
Yes.
Senator Roger Niello (28:52):
In fact, I've heard some people in
Tennessee complain thatCalifornians moving there is
making the place moreconservative.
so, we have the a, the, we havethe attitudinal changes, but we
also have the demographic,partisan net out migration that
it can affect things too.
So I, I submit all of that, thatI will wrap up in a bow by
(29:14):
saying, don't know.
Evan Meyer (29:20):
Well presented, well wrapped, and I also enjoy the
bow.
Senator Roger Niello (29:26):
Well also the wrapping paper is kind of
gray.
Evan Meyer (29:30):
Oh yeah.
Like most things, that is ametaphor for life.
The gray area, things are notblack and white.
There's nuance to everything.
Senator Roger Niello (29:39):
Yep.
Evan Meyer (29:40):
Critical thinking is required.
Senator Roger Niello (29:42):
Yes.
Evan Meyer (29:44):
Okay.
I think our last question fortoday, because I wish I can do
this for two or three hours withyou, but that's not possible.
So ai, how is this beingdiscussed in the legislature
(30:05):
from.
Well first, how is it impactingthe operations day to day, but
also where do you see it goingin the future, specifically
around the legislature, thelegislative process, and
legislative operations?
I.
Senator Roger Niello (30:20):
Well, in the legislature, the issue is
how do you regulate it?
I have said many times I have alot of very talented, very smart
colleagues, but frankly, we have120 people here, 80 in the
assembly, 40 in the Senate, whowere probably the least.
(30:42):
competent people to fullyunderstand artificial
intelligence and how to regulateit.
I have not carried anyartificial intelligence
legislation myself I believe.
So as not to discourageinnovation if we're going to
regulate it, we should regulatewhat it does, not how it's
(31:04):
developed, and some of thelegislative, efforts get into
that latter area.
And I think that controls it toomuch.
But artificial intelligence isgoing to have a significant and
profound effect on, on our econeconomy, on social issues, in,
in all sorts of ways.
(31:25):
I think the job loss issue isprobably overblown because we
have had continual.
Technological advances,especially over the last 150
years, that in human history isunprecedented.
and in the western world it hasdone nothing but vastly improve
(31:47):
and expand our economy.
And I have a hard time believingthat our artificial intelligence
will be any better and.
people that lament job losses toartificial intelligence.
I say, and I didn't author this,I heard it from somebody else,
so, I forget who, but it's, Ibelieve it's true.
You will not lose your job toartificial intelligence.
(32:10):
You will lose your job tosomebody who knows how to use
artificial intelligence.
Evan Meyer (32:16):
I like that.
Senator Roger Niello (32:16):
incredibly valuable tool.
I use it myself for, researchpurposes.
There's several differentplatforms and it is a powerful
tool that people should learnhow to use.
It will help businesses becomemore productive again.
People won't lose their job toartificial intelligence per se,
but to people who know how touse it
Evan Meyer (32:38):
Right.
Senator Roger Niello (32:38):
I'm the eternal optimist and I think
it'll be like all of the othertechnical in innovations that
we've had.
Especially in the last 150 yearsand things will be better, but
we do have to be careful.
There can be there can benegative consequences.
Evan Meyer (32:56):
Yeah.
You know, it's funny when everytime there's like a big thing
that's gonna disrupt something.
There's always some, and this isa big one, I don't want to
discount how big AI is, right?
It's as big as, at least as bigas, you know, it's the
industrial revolution or theinvention of the, you know, the
internet or.
Whatever, you know, agriculturalrevolution, the printing press,
(33:18):
the steam engine, whatever,right?
Like I, it's, it's that big andit's touching everything.
And you say to yourself, well,you know, part of, I remember
like when music sharing,peer-to-peer, Napster was the
big thing.
And then at some point you sayto yourself, look, free and
productivity.
Beat Trump.
All things that are free, thatyou can get for free if it can
(33:39):
be for free.
And things that are, that are,or almost free, we'll say, or,
or things that are radicallyproductive to make your day
easier, to give you moreinformation to help be more
productive, as in your work, inyour line of work, whatever that
just trumps off.
It is what it is.
It's not going anywhere.
You can fight it all you want.
You could say, oh, what are wegonna do?
We're all gonna lose our jobs.
(34:00):
Well.
You, you may lose your jobbecause you're not embracing
what just is.
I I can't change it.
It's just coming because,because it's productive and it's
just about free.
Senator Roger Niello (34:13):
Learn how to use it and how it can be
productive in your own life,both personally and from a
business perspective.
Evan Meyer (34:25):
That's it.
That's it.
Well, I very much enjoyed thisconversation.
I'm grateful for your time, yourexpertise and and for sharing
what you have here today.
And this was wonderful.
Thanks so much again.
And any last words you wanna sayto the world?
Senator Roger Niello (34:45):
The world.
Evan Meyer (34:48):
Communicate your last line of the world.
What do you wanna see for thewhole world?
I.
Senator Roger Niello (34:53):
I wanna see peace.
I'm troubled by things that aregoing on around the world, and
I, I want to see peace.
And I'd like to see a betterbalance of power in California.
We'll see how the 2026 electionturns out on that score in in
California.
And I'm up for reelection.
(35:13):
It'll be my last one.
I'll be turned out of the afterthat, but I'll be hopeful for, a
little bit better balance ofpartisan power in the California
state legislature.
And I've enjoyed this too.
And I'm glad that you reachedout to me for something that had
absolutely nothing whatsoever todo with your podcast, but here
we end up on your podcast.
(35:34):
So I thank you for that.
Evan Meyer (35:37):
It.
This was great.
Have a a lovely day.
We're on different time zones,so have a wonderful day and
we'll connect soon.
Senator Roger Niello (35:45):
Okay,
Evan Meyer (35:46):
All right.
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.