With help from Forest Hunt and Layla Brown-Clark

HARD TRUTHS: State Sen. Steven Bradford is one of the more outspoken members of California’s Reparations Task Force. He passionately defends the first-of-its-kind attempt to examine the state’s role in slavery and come up with proposals for reparations. He’s also an experienced politician, acutely aware of what it takes to get a bill through the Legislature.

With the completed report due by July 1, he has his hands full. The work of the nine-member task force has already faced pushback for its recommendation that eligible Black residents receive compensation for the legacy of slavery and racism that could amount to up to $1.2 million each. Gov. Gavin Newsom seemed cool to that idea. He said last month that “dealing with that legacy is about much more than cash payments,” even as he praised the broader mission of a task force that emerged amid the national outrage over the killing of George Floyd by police in May 2020. It doesn’t help that the governor and the Legislature are trying to close a $31.5 billion deficit, and there appears to be little appetite for cash payments.

We spoke to Bradford at his office about the work of the task force and the political outlook for its recommendations. A lifelong resident of Southern California, whose district includes historically Black Watts and Inglewood, the senator was realistic — but hardly defeatist about the political road ahead.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

What do you want Californians to understand about the Reparations Task Force’s final report?

That it is very detailed and speaks to who we are as a country. We wouldn’t be where we are today as a state and as a nation if it wasn’t for slavery. The vestiges and remnants of slavery still impact everything that we do: How we deal with housing, education, the criminal justice system is all a reflection of how we’ve viewed people of African heritage. The report speaks to a lot of truth that people are still in denial about or never wanted to recognize.

And the cash payments?

I think focusing on cash is a distraction. This country doesn’t have enough money to fully compensate descendants of chattel slavery. You really can’t put a dollar amount on 250 years of free labor and over 4 million African slaves. Whatever dollar amount we affixed to it will never be just compensation.

If we were going to concentrate on a dollar amount, I would first start at the wealth gap between Blacks and whites, and every leading economist in this country has stated that’s at about $360,000. That would be the floor of where the discussion starts. Anything that we can put on top of that would be icing on the cake.

Reparations are not a gift, and it’s surely not a handout. It’s something that is owed, and that was promised to descendants of slavery.

If cash payments are a distraction, what task force proposals will you focus on legislating?

I would try to package reparations similar to the GI Bill, where you provide homebuyer assistance, ongoing education and health care, maybe even low-interest loans for folks who want to start businesses. There’s not just one thing like a single cash payment, but a variety of programs and services that could be afforded to these individuals.

How do you feel about the public reaction to the task force’s report?

Well, I’m not surprised. It’s America, and America has lived a lie for 400 years. This is telling the truth. As we often say, there’s stories that made America, and stories America has made up. Much of what we teach in school is the stories that America has made up. This is the real telling of who America is, and a lot of folks don’t want to accept it.

Generational wealth is passed through land, and much of the land that’s owned in this country is by folks that don’t look like me. It’s by folks who have benefited from slavery. It’s by folks who benefited from the Homestead Act at the end of the Civil War that African Americans weren’t allowed to partake in. It’s by folks who are able to buy homes in neighborhoods that were redlined so African Americans couldn’t purchase homes.

A lot of folks want to have their head in the sand and say, “Well, that was so long ago, I didn’t own slaves,” but I’m pretty sure if you’ve been here for over 100 years, somebody in your family either owned slaves, benefited from the slave economy, or from the Jim Crow laws that existed after slavery. So, there was a direct benefit for the Caucasian community during, after and since slavery.

How do you plan to get that message to the public?

Make it a requirement in school from K-12 and start educating folks on who America truly is. We continue to tell these lies: like Columbus discovering America, George Washington can’t tell a lie and all those things.

We need to share that 10 of the first 12 presidents owned slaves in this country, but nobody wants to talk about that; 1,700 Congress people owned slaves, but nobody wants to talk about that.

California wasn’t a slave state in name only. We had a fugitive slave law. If you were brought here by your owner, you were treated as a slave. If you were brought here as a slave and you had a child, that child was a slave. We were very much a slave state until 1865.

What’s the biggest roadblock to making reparations in California a reality?

The hurdle is the Legislature. The hurdle is getting 21 votes in the Senate and 41 in the Assembly. That’s going to be the real test. That’s when you’re going to see the real allies, and it’s going to require some real profiles in courage.

Anything you want to add?

I’m excited that reparations are being talked about, not just in California but across the country. President Biden’s appointee to the U.N. [Permanent Forum on People of African Decent], Justin Hansford, is advocating strongly for reparations. They’re having that discussion now in the U.N., just as they did in 1948 regarding the Holocaust.

HAPPY MONDAY AFTERNOON! Welcome to California Playbook PM, a POLITICO newsletter that serves as an afternoon temperature check of California politics and a look at what our policy reporters are watching. Got tips or suggestions? Shoot an email to [email protected] or send a shout on Twitter. DMs are open!

CAPITOL CRIME: Politics means never missing an opportunity to tweak your opponents, and a shooting before dawn today is the latest example.

Assembly Republicans say the shooting near the statehouse — under circumstances that remain unclear and left the victim with a non-life-threatening injury — illustrate the need for a tougher-on-crime approach than what the Democrats offer with their supermajority in the Legislature.

Minority Leader James Gallagher highlighted five GOP-authored bills that would have increased penalties for crimes like domestic violence and firearm violations. Assemblymember Joe Patterson criticized Democrats for focusing on what’s happening in red states. “I really don’t need the governor talking about Florida, talking about Mississippi or bragging about how California is better than other states,” Patterson said. “All I know is that it has literally come to the footsteps of the Capitol.” — Lara Korte

UNCIVIL DISCOURSE: Attorney General Rob Bonta is dangling the possibility of civil fraud penalties for contractors hired by the state of Florida to fly 36 migrants to California. Bonta told POLITICO that the asylum-seekers said they left a temporary shelter in Texas because they were promised jobs in California. The administration of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis characterized it as a voluntary relocation. He was trying to call attention to the large numbers of people seeking asylum at the border. “They were deceived,” Bonta said in an interview today.

The attorney general is known as the top law enforcement officer in the state, but Bonta says his office more typically pursues civil penalties. In this case, he said, the state could seek penalties for deceptive business practices under unfair competition statutes. Initially, Newsom suggested those involved could face criminal charges, perhaps false imprisonment. The investigation is ongoing. — Rachel Bluth

LOOSE CHANGE: Newsom and the Legislature last year set aside $2.2 billion to buy extra power and keep the lights on during the heatwave. But blackouts were a 2022 problem. The challenge today is closing a $31.5 billion deficit. What to do? Assembly and Senate Democrats are floating an idea of raiding that emergency fund to avoid some of the cuts to state parks, coastal programs and other areas proposed by Newsom. Lawmakers would go beyond restoring the cuts in some areas and actually increase funding for some programs.

Whether that will fly remains to be seen. The Department of Water Resources said today that nearly all the money has been committed. Earlier, the administration said that the state won’t need the emergency fund for power this year. Thanks to the heavy winter rain and snow, California has more hydropower. In addition, increased battery storage capacity has come online and the threat of blackouts has receded. — Wes Venteicher

GOLDEN AGE: Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s contemporaries are retired, and they think she should retire, too. In fact, older Californians are even more likely than others to think the senator should resign, according to a new Emerson College Polling/Inside California Politics poll conducted last week and released today. Of the voters over 50 surveyed, 68 percent think the senator should resign, compared with 58 percent of voters under 50. But the majority of voters of all ages want Feinstein to leave office before her term ends in 2025, showing widespread concern about her ability to do her job as she recovers from a shingles diagnosis. Feinstein had an approval rating of only 22 percent, compared with 32 percent for Sen. Alex Padilla and 45 percent for Newsom.

— “Should San Diego ban homeless encampments? City Council decides Tuesday,” by The San Diego Union-Tribune’s Gary Warth: Submitted by City Councilmember Stephen Whitburn, the proposed ordinance would prohibit people from camping on public property if shelter options are available, but it also would ban camping on certain property, such as public parks, even if no legal shelters are available.

— “Californians were asked to cut water use 15% during the drought. How close did they get?” by the Los Angeles Times’ Hayley Smith and Sean Greene: Between July 2021, when Newsom first called on water users to voluntarily cut back, and March of this year, when he rescinded that request amid a very wet winter, statewide savings were 7%, or about half of what was requested. That amounts to about 9 fewer gallons per person per day.

— “Hotel owners start to write off San Francisco as business nosedives,” by The Wall Street Journal’s Kate King.

— “A ‘Pretendian’ claim. Territory disputes. A Bay Area tribe’s bid for federal recognition sparks conflict,” by the San Francisco Chronicle’s Shira Stein.

— “$10,000 to move into a new apartment? Bill would give California renters a break on high security deposits,” by The Mercury News’ Ethan Varian.