Earlier this week, the six highest-polling candidates for Governor of California met on a debate stage to make their case to California voters. There was no mention of the state’s transit funding crisis, ways the state could stop the flood of traffic deaths, or the need for more resilient cities from either the candidates or the governor.
But there were a pair of questions on issues Streetsblog has regularly covered: construction of the California High-Speed Rail project and whether or not the state should take action to reduce gas prices by suspending environmental rules or the state’s gas tax.
Below is a summary of the candidate’s positions, with as little editorial commentary as possible.
Gas Prices
Before you read the basic gist of each candidate’s position on the gas tax, make sure to read yesterday’s piece explaining how the state’s gas tax actually works.
Matt Mahan (D): The Mayor of San José has actively proposed a temporary gas tax holiday. Mahan argues this suspension should last as long as price spikes persist, which depending on the definition could literally be forever, pitching the idea as a direct form of cost-of-living relief for working families.
Steve Hilton (R): A leading Republican candidate, Hilton explicitly supports cutting or suspending the gas tax. His broader energy policy includes rolling back climate initiatives he blames for high prices, such as California’s cap-and-trade system and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. If Hilton were to somehow become Governor, it’s still unlikely he would be able to move the state back to an oil-based transportation system through the legislature, but his endorsement from President Trump could signal that he’s willing to use the executive office to ignore other governments.
Antonio Villaraigosa (D): The former Mayor of L.A. has a more nuanced position. While he has not fully embraced a gas tax suspension, he has suggested the state suspend key environmental rules—such as fuel standards and refinery regulations—to help lower prices. Recent reports indicate he may disagree with an outright suspension of the tax itself.
Chad Bianco (R): As Riverside County Sheriff, Bianco aligns with the general Republican stance that California should reduce taxes and regulations to bring down gas prices, though he is less detailed on specific policy mechanisms for the gas tax.
Neither in the debate, nor anywhere else, did any of the three candidates explain how they would pay for the various things the gas tax pays for, or whether the state would just stop repairing roads for a year.
Katie Porter (D): Rep. Porter has been on both sides of the issue. While she has historically opposed raising the gas tax (even backing repeal efforts in the past), her current campaign has focused more broadly on general cost-of-living pressures rather than making a gas tax repeal a central plank of her platform.
Xavier Becerra (D): The current U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services (and former CA Attorney General) has generally defended California’s climate policies. When addressing affordability, he emphasizes market oversight and consumer protection over a direct cut to the gas tax.
Also, I think it goes without saying, but none of the candidates has a position on replacing the gas tax with a vehicle miles traveled tax.
California High Speed Rail
At this week’s debate, the moderator chose the least informative possible way to ask a question about California High-Speed Rail, asking a basic yes or no question on whether or not candidates would sign a bill funding the mega-project. There was no place for candidates to explain their position or offer any nuance. At one point, when Beccerra was trying to explain his “build it faster” position, Villaraigosa and Hilton both taunted him “Yes or no!”
But over the course of the campaign, each of the candidates has taken a clearer position. Here are their stances, from the most conservative to the most liberal.
Steve Hilton (R): Hilton has explicitly stated he would “kill” the project entirely. He labels it a “prime example of waste and fraud” and argues that continuing it would only further burden taxpayers under Democratic leadership.
Chad Bianco (R): Calling it a “$100 billion high-speed rail boondoggle,” Bianco is clearly familiar with the national Republican party’s talking points about the project. His platform includes conducting a full audit of all spending. He advocates for ending the project, which he refers to as a “train to nowhere.” He also called for “arresting all of the people who stole our money.” Bianco provided no details for who those people are. The California High-Speed Rail Authority is regularly audited.
Matt Mahan (D): While not calling to “kill” it like his Republican counterparts, Mahan is highly critical, frequently citing the $20 billion spent with “nothing” delivered as evidence of California’s governance failures. He argues these delays provide “ammunition” to critics of the state and has called for fundamental reform of the environmental laws that slow down such massive builds. Moments before Mahan said this, the debate moderator gave a partial list of the projects the High-Speed Rail Authority in recent years.
Antonio Villaraigosa (D): Drawing on his experience building transit as L.A. Mayor, Villaraigosa strongly backs the project but admits to past “incompetence” and “mistakes.” He served as an infrastructure advisor to the state and argues that, if elected, he would “get it done right” by leveraging federal dollars and professional management.
Xavier Becerra (D): Becerra maintains that the project can work, provided the state can secure stronger community support and reduce the frequency of costly lawsuits that have caused years of delays. He emphasizes a path forward that balances climate goals with more efficient project delivery.
Katie Porter (D): Porter is also trying to find a middle ground. When exploring a run for governor, she famously said of the project, “That’s why I don’t think we should BS California voters. They have noticed that we don’t have a high-speed rail. And they have noticed we’ve spent money on it,” while criticizing the project’s viability. However, she expressed support at the debate this week.
Author
About The Author
