Will she or won't she? The California governor's race waits on Kamala Harris
But the candidates, and many deep-pocketed Democrats, are still waiting for the decision that will have the biggest impact on the race: whether former Vice President Kamala Harris is running.
Since Harris lost to President Trump in November, the race to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom has been in suspended animation, with candidates trying to plan their campaigns without knowing who their biggest opponents will be. A few are making contingency plans to run for other offices. And some major donors are waiting to write big checks.
'It creates a little bit of a limbo situation,' said Tony Thurmond, the state superintendent of public instruction who launched his gubernatorial campaign in 2023.
The Democrats in the race are talking to many of the same potential donors, Thurmond said, and most have the same question: 'Is she going to run?' The only answer, Thurmond said, is an unsatisfying one: 'We don't know.'
Since leaving Washington in January, Harris has mostly stayed out of the public eye, settling back into her Brentwood home with her husband, Doug Emhoff, and talking to close friends and confidantes about what she should do next. She is weighing whether to leave politics, run for governor or run for president for a third time. She is expected to make a decision about the gubernatorial race by the end of summer.
The Democrats who are already running for governor lack Harris' star power, and her entry could upend the race. But the former vice president would also face questions about her 107-day sprint to the White House, what she knew about President Biden's decline and whether someone who has run unsuccessfully for president twice really wants to be California's governor.
'She is looking closely where is the best place to put her energy and focus and her time,' said Debbie Mesloh, a longtime Harris ally.
The few public appearances Harris has made this year — meeting with firefighters in Altadena, attending a high school graduation in Compton and headlining a Democratic National Committee fundraiser in the Bay Area — have been fodder for those trying to read the tea leaves. What does it mean that Harris skipped the state Democratic Party convention? That Emhoff has taken a teaching job at USC?
Harris had originally planned to take a two-week vacation at the end of this month but has canceled her trip, according to someone familiar with her plans.
Harris has also been in New York, where she attended Broadway plays and the exclusive Met Gala; in San Francisco, where she dined with her niece Meena at the high-end Japanese restaurant Shoji; and in Los Angeles, where she has shopped for groceries at a 99 Ranch Market in Westwood and the Brentwood Farmers Market.
As the months have worn on, some gubernatorial campaigns have started to think that Harris' victory feels like less of a foregone conclusion than if she'd announced in January after leaving office.
Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former Biden Cabinet secretary Xavier Becerra and former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter of Irvine have said that they will stay in the race no matter what.
Veteran state Senate leader Toni Atkins of San Diego said she is also staying in if Harris runs, saying in a statement that 'while the vice president has her own path, our campaign is moving full speed ahead.'
Former state Controller Betty Yee said in an interview this week that even if Harris runs, she is staying in, too.
'No, no, no,' Yee said, of the possibility of seeking another statewide office. Being governor, she said, 'is what I feel like I've prepared to do. I will be staying in the race and really leaning into my fiscal and financial background.'
Yee said when she talks to donors, they want to know two things: how California can push back against the Trump administration, and what she will do if Harris enters the race.
Dan Newman, a political strategist who's worked for Newsom, Harris and several of the gubernatorial candidates, said that the race is at an odd inflection point, with candidates who 'don't know who their potential voters are, because they don't know who they're running against,' and some donors who are waiting — at least for now — to write big checks.
'They've got a good excuse to not give, because even if they are a big fan of a candidate who's in the race now, they don't know if the candidate will stay in the race,' Newman said. 'Then there are others who don't want to give to someone who might run against her.'
Eric Jaye, a political strategist who previously worked for Villaraigosa's 2018 gubernatorial campaign and advised Newsom when he was mayor of San Francisco, said he's hearing 'frustration' from donors who are ready to see the race pick up speed.
'They're not going to wait much longer,' Jaye said. 'There are going to be donors who say, 'We have to go. We're not going to wait for you.''
But even if Harris entered, that wouldn't be a guarantee that donors would back her again, including those who are angry that she spent nearly $1.5 billion in campaign funds in her compressed campaign for the White House in 2024.
'The money is very, very upset with her,' said gubernatorial candidate Stephen Cloobeck, a businessman and Democratic donor who is running for California governor. 'They're my friends. I'm part of that money. Everyone is thoroughly reeling.'
The amount of money that candidates raise is one way to gauge their support — and prospects. That picture remains a little fuzzy, though, since gubernatorial candidates have until July 31 to report their fundraising hauls from the first half of the year.
The only candidate to release numbers so far is Becerra, who said he raised $2.4 million since entering the race in early April, including a $1.1-million transfer from his congressional campaign account. Becerra's campaign has $2 million on hand, including the largest contributions allowed by law — $39,200 — from the politically connected Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and Pechanga Band of Indians.
Campaigns are required to report contributions of $5,000 or more shortly after they receive them. Those figures don't represent total fundraising, but can still show a campaign's trajectory.
Three of the eight candidates have raised less than $100,000 this year in chunks of more than $5,000 at a time, state data show. Yee reported $71,900 and Thurmond, $32,500.
Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis reported raising $70,000, including $5,000 from Google. Her campaign said Kounalakis, who has been raising money since entering the race in April 2023, has $9 million on hand.
'I want to be clear that I'm in this race to win,' Kounalakis said.
Villaraigosa, who entered the race last summer, has raised almost $1 million this year through large donations, data show. Atkins reported about $381,000 this year, and Cloobeck, about $132,000.
Porter, who entered the race in March, reported almost $475,000 in larger contributions, according to state data. She also transferred $942,000 from her U.S. Senate account to her gubernatorial account, according to federal filings made public Tuesday.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
2 minutes ago
- The Hill
Ethics panel directs Ocasio-Cortez to make more payments for Met Gala ‘Tax the Rich' outfit
The House Ethics Committee has directed Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to make around $3,000 in additional payments in relation to her attendance at the 2021 Met Gala and the iconic 'Tax the Rich' dress she wore there, saying it would consider the matter of her Met Gala attendance closed after those payments. Ocasio-Cortez had already made payments to account for the rental cost of the dress and accessories in 2022, but in a report released publicly on Friday, the Ethics Committee found the estimated rental cost to be 'unrealistic' and below market value, amounting to an impermissible gift not in compliance with federal law and House rules — even though it said the violations were not 'knowing and willful.' Ocasio-Cortez is expected to pay the difference, which would bring an end to the years-long investigation into her Met Gala attendance. While Ocasio-Cortez previously paid $990.76 for the cost of renting her Met Gala ensemble from designer Brother Vellies, the committee found that the designer's accountant previously 'vastly undervalued the apparel,' and found $3,724.04 to be closer to fair market value for the rental — saying it would be 'appropriate' for her to repay an additional $2,733.28 to comply with the Gift Rule. The Ethics Committee also found that Ocasio-Cortez should donate the $250 cost of her now-fiance's meal at the gala to the Met's Costume Institute. The panel noted that Ocasio-Cortez made 'significant steps' to comply with House gift rules, and that her attendance at the event otherwise complied with House rules. 'The Congresswoman appreciates the Committee finding that she made efforts to ensure her compliance with House Rules and sought to act consistently with her ethical requirements as a Member of the House,' Mike Casca, Ocasio-Cortez's chief of staff, said in a statement. 'She accepts the ruling and will remedy the remaining amounts, as she's done at each step in this process.' Ocasio-Cortez separately previously paid for the cost of makeup, hotel rooms, transportation, and other 'similar benefits' in connection with attending the Met Gala, totaling around $7,500. With the new costs directed by the committee, Ocasio-Cortez will have personally paid over $10,000 for the Met Gala evening, her counsel told the Ethics Committee. 'It would be nonsensical to suggest that the Congresswoman should have been prepared to pay for aspects of items and services that she didn't know about and didn't authorize,' her counsel said in a May 2025 letter. The Ethics Committee first released a report from the Office of Congressional Ethics — now called the Office of Congressional Conduct — in 2023 that scrutinized Ocasio-Cortez's Met Gala attendance and suggested she may have accepted impermissible gifts related to the event. That report showed frustration from some vendors about payments for hair and makeup services for the event being delayed for months, as well as payments for her Met Gala ensemble and other associated costs being paid months later. After further investigation, the Ethics Committee determined that the delay in making payments was not intentional and Ocasio-Cortez was not personally aware of the extent of the delays. But the panel also determined that Ocasio-Cortez's payments for her outfit were below market value, and that efforts to estimate the cost 'failed to account for the true cost of such unique goods, particularly considering that they were custom-made for the congresswoman and likely had no further use after the event.' And it dinged Ocasio-Cortez's team for bringing up the mass-market clothing rental service Rent the Runway as a data point when assessing costs associated with renting a Met Gala outfit, as a Brother Vellies accountant testified and a publicist testified. 'The comparison of a one-of-a-kind, custom-made designer gown to those sold commercially and rented to numerous individuals on Rent the Runway is simply inapposite,' the Ethics Committee said. Ocasio-Cortez's counsel told the panel in 2024 that Rent the Runway was brought up only when estimating if the congresswoman could afford to attend the event, and that the congresswoman did not direct others to use those estimations to influence the cost of a rental. The panel estimated that cost of goods to create the dress was $6,279.10 rather than $1,000 — making the 'true retail value of the gown designed for Representative Ocasio-Cortez was likely approximately $18,837.30, and $2,976.29 would be a more reasonable fair market value for rental of the gown' rather than It also said the invoice provided by Brother Vellies did not account for a custom flower hairpiece that Ocasio-Cortez wore, and that Ocasio-Cortez should pay $36.71 to account for the rental of that hairpiece. The panel found previous invoices of $160 for rental of shoes, $170 for rental of a handbag, and $78.47 for rental of jewelry to be permissible.


Forbes
2 minutes ago
- Forbes
AOC Will Pay $3,000 For Ethics Violations Over Met Gala Appearance
The House Ethics Committee on Friday found Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., violated ethics rules after she 'impermissibly' accepted gifts during her appearance at the 2021 Met Gala—including her white dress with the phrase, 'Tax the Rich'—and said the lawmaker must pay roughly $3,000 to settle the claims. A yearslong probe found Ocasio-Cortez 'impermissibly' accepted gifts for the event, including a ... More white dress with the phrase, 'Tax the Rich.' GC Images The bipartisan Ethics Committee found Ocasio-Cortez 'impermissibly' accepted a gift of free admission to the Met Gala for her now-fiancé Riley Roberts, valued at about $35,000, and failed to pay the full market price for some of the items she wore to the event, though a probe found she did not intentionally violate ethics rules. An investigation found Ocasio-Cortez coordinated with Met Gala staff to ensure she would not violate House rules, which the staff confirmed, and that Ocasio-Cortez was offered a guest ticket to attend, the committee said. Ocasio-Cortez paid just over $990 for the dress, shoes, handbag and jewelry she wore to the event, and must pay the remaining $2,733 to cover the fair market price of the items and settle the claims, according to the committee, in addition to $250—the price of a meal at the Met—to cover Roberts' attendance. Mike Casca, Ocasio-Cortez's chief of staff, said in a statement she 'accepts the ruling and will remedy the remaining amounts, as she's done at each step in this process.' An early inquiry found designer Brother Vellies originally billed Ocasio-Cortez $1,300 for her 'Tax the Rich dress,' and a later invoice requested $300. It's not immediately clear why the price tag was reduced, though a former campaign staffer for Ocasio-Cortez told the Ethics Committee they discussed her complete attire totaling about $1,000. Key Background The House Ethics Committee opened an investigation into Ocasio-Cortez's Met Gala appearance in December 2022, months after the American Accountability Foundation filed an ethics complaint. Experts told Forbes at the time that Ocasio-Cortez's acknowledging she wore 'borrowed items' to the event indicated she violated House gift rules, which prevent lawmakers from accepting gifts like free attendance to events and travel. In an Instagram post, Ocasio-Cortez defended attending the Met Gala for free, arguing elected officials in New York City are 'regularly invited to and attend the Met due to our responsibilities' overseeing the city's cultural institutions. Forbes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Likely Violated Ethics Laws With Met Gala Appearance, Says House Ethics Office By Zach Everson
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gilbert: Tony Evers' exit makes for a rare, truly open governor's race
Democrat Tony Evers' decision not to seek a third term means Wisconsin voters will experience something unusual in this political era — a truly 'open' race for governor. Nine of the past 10 gubernatorial contests in this state have involved a sitting governor. Now we know that the 2026 election will not. That makes the next campaign for governor more open-ended than it would have been, and harder to handicap. It also means there's a possibility both parties will have costly and hotly contested primaries for the state's highest office. Evers' decision not only alters the nature of the general election contest, but it also means the governor's race could serve as a platform for Democrats to debate their future in the aftermath of the party's momentous national defeat last year to Donald Trump and the GOP. For Democrats, a defeat for governor in 2026 in the nation's closest state would be hugely demoralizing. It also would be a major political failure, given the political advantage typically enjoyed in a midterm election by the party that is out of power in Washington. On the other hand, from a historical perspective, a Democratic victory would be groundbreaking. Coming as it would after Evers' two terms in office, it would produce the Democratic Party's longest hold on the governor's office in Wisconsin's nearly 180-year existence. Incredible as it sounds, Democrats have never occupied the office of governor for more than eight years in a row in Wisconsin. That is a testimony to several things: the dominance of the GOP in the state's first 100 years; the fact that until the 1970s, elections for governor here occurred every two years, not four; and the state's penchant for political swings in the current era of partisan parity and polarization. Let's look a little more closely at the history of governors' races here to put 2026 into some very broad perspective. Democrats have only once won three gubernatorial elections in a row in Wisconsin. It happened in the late 1950s and early 1960s when governors served two-year terms: Gaylord Nelson won in 1958 and 1960 and John Reynolds won in 1962. By contrast, Republicans have a history of longevity in power. There have been eight three-term Republican governors in Wisconsin's history, though only Tommy Thompson has done it since the four-year term was instituted beginning with the 1970 election. Thompson is the state's longest-serving governor (just over 14 years, from 1987 to 2001) and the only one to win four elections in a row. Only one other politician has tried to win three four-year terms, Republican Scott Walker, but he lost his bid for a third term to Evers in 2018. That Walker defeat illustrates some of the challenges a party faces staying in power in the current era. There is voter fatigue, which caught up with Walker after a drama-filled eight years, including a polarizing recall fight in 2014 and the failed bid he launched for the presidency in 2015. There is the cyclical nature of modern politics. Wisconsin has a history in mid-terms of voting against the party of the president, which worked against Republicans in 2002, against Democrats in 2010, and against Republicans in 2018. (Evers broke this pattern in 2022). In other words, America's frequent presidential swings have also produced frequent mid-term swings at the state level here. And finally, there is the state's extreme competitiveness. It was easier for a single party to stay in power when Wisconsin was dominated by one party. Since Wisconsin became a state in 1848, the governor's office has been held by four different parties: Republican, Democratic, Whig, and Progressive. But Republicans have been dominant for most of that history, at one point (between 1857 and 1930) winning 34 out of 37 contests for governor. Republicans have never been shut out of the governor's office for more than eight years in a row (a streak now in jeopardy). And there have been five different periods when Republicans held the office of governor for longer than eight years: ∎ 1987-2001, the Tommy Thompson era. It only ended when Thompson left office halfway through his fourth term to be health secretary under President George W. Bush. His lieutenant governor, Scott McCallum, filled the remainder of that term before losing the 2002 election to Democrat Jim Doyle. ∎ 1943-1959, when four different GOP governors served and Republicans won seven elections in a row for governor (again, these were two-year terms). ∎ 1895-1933. This was the longest period of Republican governance. Ten different Republican governors served, including both Fighting Bob La Follette and his son Philip. The GOP won 19 consecutive elections for governor. ∎ 1876-1891. ∎ 1856-1874. That history of lopsided control is long gone in Wisconsin, replaced not only by frequent partisan swings but also by routinely close elections. The past two races for governor have been the two closest of the past 60 years. The fact that this is now an open-seat race, without a sitting governor on the ballot, adds to the suspense. The last time this happened was 2010, when Walker was first elected. But the last time before that was more than 40 years ago in 1982. Evers would have been a formidable candidate for re-election as the most popular politician in the state, according to polling by the Marquette Law School. At the same time, his age (73) and the challenges of winning a third term were potential election wild cards. Without Evers on the ballot, this race will still be hugely influenced by the national political climate next year and by public opinion toward Trump. Democrats will still go into this race with the historic advantage of running against the party of the president. But historical patterns don't dictate the outcomes of elections; they just put them in context. Candidate quality matters. And in 2026, that is now a big unknown for both sides. Craig Gilbert provides Wisconsin political analysis as a fellow with Marquette University Law School's Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education. Prior to the fellowship, Gilbert reported on politics for 35 years at the Journal Sentinel, the last 25 in its Washington Bureau. His column continues that independent reporting tradition and goes through the established Journal Sentinel editing him on Twitter: @Wisvoter. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Gilbert: Tony Evers' exit makes for a rare, truly open governor's race