Sheehy Strategy Group

09/09/2026

If Governor Gavin Newsom is foolish enough to sign this massive pension increase, he will solidify his role in damaging California’s fiscal integrity, state and local government budgets, and taxpayers pocketbooks.

This is not free money, it comes from the taxpayers. Jerry Brown in his second two-term round as governor pursued pension reform because it was the right thing to do. Jerry Brown was a wise statesman and a good fiscal steward of the states economy and budget health.

I pray that Governor Newsom doesn’t undo the good work that Jerry Brown did and send California spiraling further into the fiscal abyss.

A bill to boost pension benefits for public safety workers could cost state and local governments — and taxpayers — more than $8 billion.

09/04/2026

This is GREAT news and shows current policies of energy independence and re-shoring American industrial production is paying off.

The US labor market in August roused from its early summer slumber by adding 162,000 jobs, more than double what economists had expected, while the unemployment rate remained at 4.1%, new data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed Friday.

08/23/2026

California’s New Tire Mandate: Another Regulation for Consumers to Navigate

California consumers already face some of the nation’s highest costs for gasoline, electricity, housing and transportation. Now state regulators have added something else to the list: new requirements governing the replacement tires Californians can purchase.

The California Energy Commission recently approved the nation’s first Replacement Tire Efficiency Program, establishing minimum energy-efficiency standards for replacement tires sold for passenger cars and light-duty trucks. The first phase takes effect in 2029, with more stringent requirements beginning in 2033.

The goal is straightforward: reduce the “rolling resistance” of tires so vehicles use less gasoline or electricity. The Commission estimates the initial requirement will add about $1.50 per tire, or $6 for a set of four, beginning in 2029. When the more stringent standards take effect in 2033, the CEC estimates the additional cost will rise to approximately $6.50 per tire, or $26 per set.

The state argues consumers will ultimately come out ahead. The CEC estimates that a typical gasoline-powered vehicle owner will save about $179 in fuel over the life of a set of tires under the fully implemented standard—considerably more than its estimated $26 additional purchase price.

If those estimates prove accurate, that sounds like a good deal.

But there are reasons for consumers to be cautious. The $26 figure is a government estimate, not a guaranteed retail price increase, and some tire industry representatives contend actual costs could be considerably higher. There are also concerns about reduced product availability, compliance and enforcement, and the effect the regulation could have on lower-priced tire choices.

That raises a larger issue for California consumers.

Even regulations with worthwhile objectives can impose additional costs, reduce consumer choice and increase the expense of doing business in California. One new requirement may seem relatively small. But California families don’t experience regulations one at a time—they experience the cumulative cost of housing, energy, gasoline, vehicles, insurance, taxes and countless state mandates.

For a state already struggling with affordability, policymakers should be asking a simple question before imposing another mandate: Do the benefits to consumers clearly outweigh the costs?

08/16/2026

California’s population exodus should be setting off alarm bells in Sacramento.

New IRS migration data show Los Angeles County lost a net 17,496 tax filers to other states—taking nearly $1.9 billion in income with them. Orange County lost another 11,618 filers, San Diego 9,401, Riverside 8,968 and San Bernardino 8,462.

This isn’t simply about population. It’s about California’s tax base, investment and economic competitiveness.

Yet this November, voters are being asked to consider going further.

Proposition 3 would make California’s higher income-tax rates on high earners permanent. Proposition 40 would impose a one-time 5% wealth tax on California billionaires.

Supporters argue these taxes are needed to fund important public services. But there’s a serious question California cannot ignore:

What happens when the taxpayers and investors being asked to pay more decide to leave?

Investor Mark Cuban is already warning that the billionaire tax could affect where he invests and where startups he backs locate their businesses.

California remains an extraordinary economic powerhouse. But that advantage shouldn’t be taken for granted.

With residents, taxable income and investment already flowing elsewhere, perhaps the question isn’t how much more California can tax those who remain.

It’s what California needs to do to convince them to stay.

08/15/2026

As the Legislature enters the final two weeks of the 2026 session, California businesses continue to oppose three significant bills regulating the use of artificial intelligence and automated technologies in the workplace: AB 1883 (Bryan), SB 947 (McNerney), and SB 951 (Reyes).All three remain alive and, if approved by the Legislature, could soon be sent to Governor Newsom.

While each bill takes a different approach, together they would impose substantial new restrictions, compliance requirements and potential liability on California employers using emerging technologies.

>AB 1883 would restrict workplace technologies capable of making certain inferences about workers, potentially sweeping in security cameras and other tools employers use to help maintain workplace safety. The bill also establishes penalties for violations and applies provisions to independent contractors as well as employees.

>SB 947 would restrict employers from relying solely on automated decision systems when making employment-related decisions and require human review and corroboration of AI-generated information. The business community believes these requirements could create costly administrative burdens, delay legitimate employment decisions and increase litigation exposure.

>SB 951 would establish extensive new requirements when employers make workforce changes involving AI or automation, including notice requirements and disclosure of information concerning AI systems, technology vendors and business decisions. The bill would create obligations beyond those currently imposed under Cal-WARN.

Taken together, these bills represent a premature and overly prescriptive approach to a rapidly evolving technology. California employers need reasonable rules that protect workers while allowing businesses to responsibly adopt technologies that can improve safety, productivity and competitiveness. Businesses will continue opposing these measures during the final days of the legislative session.

08/12/2026

At the State Capitol with advocates representing the contractor community.

The Contractor State Licensing Board Executive Director and his staff were briefing on current and upcoming policy issues that the various license holders are facing and that the CSLB is responsible for regulating.

08/11/2026

At State Capitol yesterday in Sacramento with Senator Roger Niello.

08/05/2026

Today at the State Capitol in Sacramento with Senator Tim Grayson.

Senator Grayson is not only really good on policy that can help California residents and businesses, but he’s a genuinely nice person. In the advocacy community, we are so pleased that we have him as a voice of common sense.

07/02/2026

July is off to a strong start for Informed Policy Advocates.

This week marks one of the busiest periods of California's legislative session as lawmakers work to move bills through policy committees before the Legislature begins its summer recess on July 3. When legislators return in August, bills that remain alive will continue through the Appropriations Committees and floor votes before reaching the Governor's desk.

On July 1, the Capitol was buzzing as legislators hurried between committee hearings to advance their legislation. IPA was actively engaged throughout the day, taking positions on three important bills and providing testimony on behalf of California families.

Read more: https://lnkd.in/gB9bntNb

06/01/2026

California now has the highest unemployment rate of all fifty states in the Union, stubbornly hovering at 5.5%, and its job market appears to be going in the wrong direction. The total number of jobs in California actually shrank by 0.6% since the beginning of this year, making it the 17th worst-performing state in the nation in terms of job creation.

About 15 million Californians are poor enough to qualify for healthcare under the state’s Medi-Cal program but, as Newsom failed to mention in his Center for American Progress presentation, his new budget reduces Medi-Cal eligibility for some Californians to shrink the state’s chronic budget deficit, which he also didn’t mention during his recitation of cherry-picked data.

Gov. Newsom often brags about California's productivity and Nobel winners but omits its recent tech layoffs, shrinking jobs base and growing gaps between rich and poor.