Inside California’s Bill Process: Power, Politics & Transparency | Senator Roger Niello

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

Transcript

Evan Meyer: 0:40

Welcome to Meyer Side Chats, the podcast where leadership, innovation, and governance meets solutions oriented thinking and civil discourse to shape better communities. Today I am honored to be joined by California State Senator Roger Nelo. Senator Nelo represents the sixth Senate district and brings decades of public service and business experience to Sacramento. He's currently the vice chair of Senate budget Committee amongst a bunch of committees, actually. And, and he is been a consistent, a advocate for fiscal responsibility, structural reform, and pragmatic governance. Senator, thank you for joining us today.

Senator Roger Niello: 1:19

Well, thanks for having me. But you start out saying a civil, I've gotta be civil.

Evan Meyer: 1:25

Oh, well, you know, if we want more clicks, we might as well make this heated and contravertial Let's get into real fiery stuff.

Senator Roger Niello: 1:31

Yell and scream. No, that's not my style.

Evan Meyer: 1:34

That's how you get things done, right? Yell and scream at each other.

Senator Roger Niello: 1:37

Yeah. Thanks. Thanks for having me.

Evan Meyer: 1:40

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 your mind about what's going on at the state level or maybe federal level. What's top of mind for you when you woke up this morning in all things politics?

Senator Roger Niello: 1:56

I wake up usually a few times during the night and things occur to me that I have to get up and write down so that I can go back to sleep again. But, we're on recess now, so, uh. top of mind are things that are going on in the district. I'm meeting with a young professionals group in Roseville on morning. So I have to start thinking about what I'm gonna say there. And then we'll be going back into session week after next and for the final week of session. And I have several bills that are still alive and, i'll be I'll be thinking more about that now. You mentioned the sixth, Senate District, which of course is my district. It's the east side of Sacramento County and South Placer County. And I think it's important for the viewers to know that we call this the Jay Leno district because this is the map of my district. See Jay Lenos profile in there. couldn't help. I had to make sure we shared that with the audience.

Evan Meyer: 3:08

Who calls it the Jay Leno district? Just to be clear.

Senator Roger Niello: 3:11

Well, I showed the map of the district to a friend of mine when I was running for Senate when I first saw the map, that didn't even occur to me, and she said it was on an email exchange. She said, that's the Jay Leno district. And I looked at it again and I had to agree with her.

Evan Meyer: 3:30

Well, Jay Leno, if you're listening to this quick shout out to you for representing Senator Nilo. So well.

Senator Roger Niello: 3:37

Right.

Evan Meyer: 3:38

so, tell us, you said a few of these bills are still alive and, you know, I think a lot of a lot of people don't. Understand, especially at the state level, how these things really work. So when you say alive, it was probably killed at some portion throughout the process. There's a long process for a bill to become law, which is actually quite comforting in a lot of ways. But what are those bills? Where did, where did they get stopped? What are those bills? And just tell me a little bit about that process.

Senator Roger Niello: 4:11

Well, probably the two most important bills to me, are the the one that deals with giving small businesses the right to cure a an a DA Americans with Disabilities access defect. Without having been sued by it. We have a, a, a few predatory lawyers, law law firms in California that target small businesses threaten to sue, but say they'll go away for and it that's, that's what ends up happening. So. And the other one is I think my communications director talked with you about what we call my title and summary bill. And that is a bill that would transfer to the legislative analyst, the responsibility for writing title and summary statements on. ballot propositions. Currently it's in the hands of the Attorney General, which of course is a partisan, elected official. And many times they have a bias on a particular proposition. And that bias will show when they write the short title and summary statement. And unfortunately, a lot of people make up their mind on how to vote based upon. The title and summary statement as opposed to the detailed analysis, which the alleged analyst writes anyway. So it'd be no trouble for them to write the title and summary statement, which would be, a much less biased statement. Bill, obviously, democratic leadership does not want to pass. Although I've gotten it out of the Senate Elections Committee two times in the last three years. But it gets killed in the Appropriations Committee in a rather, opaque process, which we can talk about a little bit later. But it died there. That other bill, which we call the Right to Cure Bill actually good example of bipartisan collaboration. I have half of the Democratic caucus over half as either joint authors or co-authors on that bill, plus my Republican colleagues. And it passed overwhelmingly out of the Senate. that bill, it's not dead. It's still alive in the assembly. Judiciary committee because the consultant of that committee doesn't like the bill and so they refuse to give me a hearing. So we're gonna work on, continue to work on that next year and next year. I will also introduce once again the title and summary bill. So those are two that are important to me that are not going forward this year. But, but I do have four bills that are on the suspense file in the assembly appropriations committee and three other bills that are going to the assembly floor.

Evan Meyer: 7:10

Just because. You know, something that caught me and, and it's so important'cause I read all the documentation in the, in those, in the booklets about bills. And I've had a lot of thoughts of my own about them. Sometimes it's lacking a lot of information. Sometimes it's completely biased, some, and, you know, 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: 7:44

you mean the title and summary? Bill?

Evan Meyer: 7:46

Correct

Senator Roger Niello: 7:47

Democratic leadership.

Evan Meyer: 7:49

leadership,

Senator Roger Niello: 7:49

I as I said it is, the bill has passed out of the Senate Elections Committee two times, once in 2023, Again now in 2025, I think it was unanimous. And a a Democrat is a joint author with me on the bill, so there is support. the troops, if you will. But I'm quite sure that the Attorney General is probably expressing his view on that committee, to Democratic leadership. And the way the appropriations committee works is bills that are assigned to appropriations. And by the way, this bill has virtually no fiscal impact. They say it does, but. The alleged analyst writes the detailed analysis for him to write. The title and summary statement really would be no additional expense, but nonetheless is sent to the appropriations committee. All bills are put on what's called the suspense file. then bills are voted on to pull off of the suspense file and 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 or against those bills. They just die in the darkness. That's why I said a few minutes ago, it's a very opaque process. Heavily criticized, but nonetheless, it sticks. It was that way when I was in the assembly and it's that way still, and that's how that bill died.

Evan Meyer: 9:28

And so why do you think he's conveying that message to democratic leadership as, as the attorney general?

Senator Roger Niello: 9:36

Well, I don't know that he is, but I have to strongly suspect because there, it's, it's unexplainable why that bill stays on the suspense file when it passes overwhelmingly out of the elections Committee and never even gets an, gets a vote in the appropriations committee.

Evan Meyer: 9:56

you, you don't really know the answer to why, which is part of the opa, which is part of the opaqueness of what you're

Senator Roger Niello: 10:02

Exactly, but I speculate that the attorney general is probably opining in the background because the bill would take away him the ability to editorialize on title and summary statements.

Evan Meyer: 10:15

Oh boy. Yeah. And I guess anytime you

Senator Roger Niello: 10:18

you're,

Evan Meyer: 10:18

yeah.

Senator Roger Niello: 10:19

familiar with this redistricting proposal. In California and the governor and the Democratic leadership want to put a ballot measure on this coming November for the voters to vote on actual maps that will reduce Republican seats in Congress outta Let's just watch and see. What that title and summary statement says when that ballot proposition goes to the voters, I suspect it will be a highly statement that will recruit support for the proposition as opposed to being completely impartial.

Evan Meyer: 11:03

How come? How come that's not so obvious in 2025 that it's taken us this long to see that the thing that people are voting on for the most part, right? There's like a how far you go through your research to and spend time to vote. You could spend months trying to understand the problem before making an educated vote, right? So this is supposed to. Help you make a more, an informed vote in less time in a lot of ways. And if you only read, say the summary or an analysis, you, you're only getting a piece of the puzzle anyway. Why do you, why do you think that it's not so obvious? Right. It's like the first layer of like transparency and authenticity in the voting process would be right there where the people open and look and read this very top line information and we're still in 2025 dealing with like, okay, someone's editorializing, potentially like, yeah, the most basic level.

Senator Roger Niello: 12:00

Well, it's not a new issue. I've been working on this since I was in the assembly in I think it was somewhere around 2008, a constituent called my office and suggested this as something that I ought to work on, and I, I thought. That's not a bad idea. So, I worked on it when I was in the assembly without success. Then when I was termed out of the assembly, a a state senator gene Fuller. Who my chief Assembly, chief of staff went to work for. She worked on it the entire time she was there, and then when she was termed out, Kevin Kiley was elected to the assembly and then he picked it up and worked on it until he ran for Congress and won. And that was the same time that I came back in. So there have been Republicans working on this for 15 years. But again, people are a lot, not enough people are witnessing what's going on. and a lot too many people rely on that title and summary statement. Maybe a better thing to be would be to just do away with it and force people to read the detail, which isn't that. Laborious anyway. But in any case not enough people have noticed it. there was a proposition 47, about 10 years ago was a a a justice reform bill, quote unquote, called Proposition 47, which. Lots of unintended consequences that a proposition passed last November intended to, to fix Proposition 36, if you're familiar with it. But that original Proposition 47, which Kamala Harris as Attorney General wanted to pass, she gave at the title in summary statement, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act. Which was obviously a bias. So, and that's been talked about a lot, so maybe people are becoming more aware of that.

Evan Meyer: 13:58

It's about time

Senator Roger Niello: 13:59

Yeah.

Evan Meyer: 14:00

probably'cause it must be going on through as long as there's been title and summary statements, if we're still dealing with it now.

Senator Roger Niello: 14:07

the Attorney General has had this responsibility forever. And there there's a examples of Republicans that snuck an editorial into a title and summary statement too. It's just that in the last 25, 30 years, the Attorney General has almost always been a democrat.

Evan Meyer: 14:26

Yeah, and, and California with such a super majority it. Sometimes I think that, you whatever side you're on there, there should be an awareness that there is a super majority and that a lot of what people are seeing are going to lean in that direction. And sometimes, I don't know if it's clear enough that, you know, we, we, we pride ourselves in diversity of thinking. And of, of people for their, all the beautiful things that a diverse population brings to our society. And you know, this is an example of diversity, of thinking. And if you lean too far in one direction, you're gonna have problems with not having enough balance. And is it, and that seems fairly obvious to me as well, whether you believe in one thing or not. Part of the system is meant to balance each other so that things can operate, it can coexist well, and you can have balanced legislation.

Senator Roger Niello: 15:30

And, and I know a lot of Democrats not necessarily elected officials, although some elected officials that in private conversations will share that they do not think it's healthy to have such an imbalance in. In power in the state. And I, there are signs that it somebody compared where we are in California to the mid nineties, nationally, when nude Gingrich and Republicans took over Congress and it was not expected, that was a surprise. And it wasn't because a whole bunch of Democrats Republicans. It was because a whole bunch of Democrats voted Republican because they didn't like the way things were going. And I think it's instructive to note that president Trump got of the vote. In California in the last election, which exceeds the percentage of registered Republicans in the state and in particular made gains with black and brown voters, particularly young males. So, there are some reactions unfortunately. Not enough. There are still people that that vote based upon the R or the D next to the name,

Evan Meyer: 16:43

Yeah.

Senator Roger Niello: 16:44

the controllers, last controllers race is a good example of that. Chen was the Republican candidate. Eminently qualified, a brilliant guy, and he received the endorsement of every major newspaper in the state, every one. But he still because too many people voted. Democrat that were Democrats voted Democrat, although there were a lot that switched because he did receive more votes than any other statewide Republican running. But he didn't win and he really should have.

Evan Meyer: 17:18

Yeah. Yeah. I meet a lot of people that vote D down the line, or r down the line. And I think that, I do also think that's unhealthy and it doesn't, it doesn't allow for critical thinking either. It doesn't let you think, you know, if you understand people have to put a D or an R and a lot of people feel differently just'cause you have that, you may feel like you're a D in some ways or an R in other ways. and it doesn't allow for nuance. And that I, this is something I've been sort of fighting for for so long in civics, is like the ability to understand. There's nuance. It's not all or nothing all the time, just'cause you read a thing in headlines and you think that everyone fits into this category and I hope we could do better.

Senator Roger Niello: 18:00

And, and that. That gets back to civics education in the K through 12 system, which has been frankly lacking. I worked with a, the county superintendent of education here in Sacramento County along with a judge and a former. district superintendent and to try to convince our school districts here to include civics education throughout the K through 12 spectrum, which every district in the in the county adopted a resolution with the exception of one. And then the pandemic hit. So it sort of hurt that progress, but we could do a much better job. Teaching civics and civic engagement. Engagement is really important. Every time we come up with a, a proposition to make it easier for people to register to vote and 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 and engaged more educated and engaged voters. And that's what's really important in a, in a, in a democracy.

Evan Meyer: 19:06

Right? Yeah, there is, there is. The argument is what's, what's worse? Someone not voting or being an uneducated voter. I've heard that line before. I think that's a philosophical question. It could probably go back and forth for a long time, but it is an, it is an outstanding question, and I don't know if we do a, a, a good enough job at, at, at getting people to think through how they would solve a problem in the right way of going about solving it. It's a, it's, it's, it's lacking.

Senator Roger Niello: 19:36

I, I think our education of civics academically as well as civic engagement could be much better.

Evan Meyer: 19:46

Yeah. So you've been let's, let's direct this sentiment and conversation towards California budgeting with taking all that we just talked about and, and, and. Figuring out, you know, that you've had such a strong focus on budget, in the, in the legislature. What, what is your assessment right now of the current budget challenges in California?

Senator Roger Niello: 20:13

down. We had tremendous surpluses a couple years I was elected they were essentially spent I think we. Need a much more disciplined approach toward establishing reserves. And I can talk about my thought on that in a moment. But we developed significant deficits. And the good news is the state still has a relatively healthy cash position and this year's budget had a deficit, we had to meet that is. Established spending programs that exceeded expected revenues by about$12 billion. that's a lot of money, but that can be that gap can be closed through a number of issues that avoid too much in the way of expense reductions. But the problem is that projecting the same situation out. two to four years, we're gonna be looking at 20 to$30 billion deficits and and, and, and climbing revenues come back in line with, with established spending programs. That's why it's called a structural deficit, and we're not doing enough now to identify. Programs that aren't working, as well as was expected when they were started so as to cut back or reduce those programs because we're gonna have significant budget challenges headed into the fiscal year after this one and the next two or three after that. And what's frustrating is I don't see that the leadership, which really has control because they have a super majority my my weapon is my mouth. And I'm not always totally, listened to. So, that's that's frustrating and we have challenges.

Evan Meyer: 22:02

So when you're in these committee meetings, which is a mix of Democrats and Republicans, and you're talking about budget. Do these, do these things come up? Does this conversation come up in those, in those committee meetings? Do you express these thoughts? Does, does, does it feel like you're at least somewhat hopeful about some of the work that's being done there?

Senator Roger Niello: 22:25

there's two things that I bring up. I said one time that I apologize for being a broken record. And another member of the legislature who I worked with on the budget committee in the assembly, walked up to me after I said that and he said given the age of people here, I suspect most people don't know what a broken record is,

Evan Meyer: 22:51

That's a funny joke to tell in a situation like that, I think. Right? Yeah.

Senator Roger Niello: 22:56

but I always try to use humor along with my serious points, but there are two things that I continually bring up. One is that, which I just mentioned, and I can't say that it elicits a detailed discussion of the issue but I get the point out. Uh, the other thing is that the, the essential final budget package, irrespective of all the committee meetings that we have, both the subcommittee meetings, which are. There's subcommittees for various subjects of the, of the budget and then the full budget committee meeting. We do have those committee meetings, but essentially the final budget is developed through a meeting, door meetings, between the president pro tem, the speaker of the assembly, and the governor. other words, three Democrats. And that is a also a somewhat opaque process. And I continually speak to that issue also. So those are the primary things that I talk about. And being a member of the super minority my impact just depends on how people react to it. But it doesn't I don't sense that it moves the needle all that much.

Evan Meyer: 24:10

Do you think your democratic colleagues would agree that the process is opaque?

Senator Roger Niello: 24:16

Yes, I do. They're not gonna admit it, but I think a lot of them agree with that because remember I mentioned just three people. Rest of the Democrats, by and large, maybe the maybe the budget shares in the assembly and the and the Senate and maybe a few others in leadership. But of the rank and file Democrats in the Assembly and the Senate are not involved in those behind the door, conversations. So yes, I would suspect that the frustration goes beyond my caucus.

Evan Meyer: 24:50

You've put forward the title and summary Bill? Is there any other legislation that has been put forth to address the opaqueness? And do you wish there was some le additional legislation to address this? What, what, how would you see this moving in a better direction? And, and improving over, over time. Obviously you can't fix this overnight, but like what, what can we do in addition to your bill to start fixing.

Senator Roger Niello: 25:22

most of the process that is less than transparent, transparent is. Process. It's not legislated, it's practice. And so, the answer to that would be the the hypothetical rhetorical question, if I were king. what would I do? And I, I would seek to improve all of these things. I've said time and again with regard to the title and summary legislation. a Republican was continually Attorney General, I would still support this legislation because it makes sense. And if Republicans all of a sudden gained control. Would we change the suspense process in the appropriations committee? I would argue that we should would we open up those behind closed door meetings? I would argue that we should I'd have to wait and see if the rest of my Republicans colleague, agreed, colleagues agreed with that if we regained control. But again, those are process issues that really can't be fixed via legislation. Well, I

Evan Meyer: 26:27

Yeah.

Senator Roger Niello: 26:27

they can't, but if it's the way the majority party wants it a legislative approach wouldn't succeed.

Evan Meyer: 26:34

Hmm. Interesting. That's interesting. You know, it's, it's, if you look at the chart of how often of, of flipping from Democrat to Republican and vice versa, it's about, it's almost that time, if not that time right now. I forget the exact chart, but it flips right when there, there's been, I don't wanna say 30 or 40 years ago, it was Republican and then 30 or 40 years before that it was Democrat. And this, the, the, the, the, the polls. Switch and the fee, the sentiment of what someone would normally be a Democrat is, becomes Republican and sort of vice versa. This happens every several decades. It's happened a number of times in California. Do you think that shift is on its way? Or will it take longer this time, but, or, or will it never happen again? Which to me seems unlikely because things. Cycle. So I'm just, where do you feel about that?

Senator Roger Niello: 27:34

Well, first of all, I never believe in never,

Evan Meyer: 27:37

neither.

Senator Roger Niello: 27:38

I have to look at this on a couple of different levels. One is I mentioned before that president Trump received 40% of the vote, which exceeds the percentage of Republican registrations, and made inroads among particularly young men of color which illustrates perhaps a trend in the direction that you state, There are demographic, migration. There's demographic mi migration that's going on. If you look back to the end of the Cold War, industry was very large in California. is early 1990s, right. And Texas was a democratic state. California was a Republican state, and the people, mostly Southern California, people that were in the defense industry moved out of the state. I believe a lot of'em moved to Texas. Texas and Arizona. Arizona, I think was a a leaning blue state back then also Texas and Arizona, became Republican states and California gradually became democratic. And so, it isn't just a matter of shifting. Attitudes because maybe one super majority party goes a little too far in some areas. It's also the migration of people, and we have had. A larger out migration from California than an in migration. And it appears that it's mostly, Republicans moving out. Whether that means Republicans moving in or not I don't know. But there are a lot of Republicans who have become frustrated with the super majority and they've moved to Tennessee, to Texas areas like

Evan Meyer: 29:31

Yes.

Senator Roger Niello: 29:32

In fact, I've heard some people in Tennessee complain that Californians moving there is making the place more conservative. so, we have the a, the, we have the 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, that I will wrap up in a bow by saying, don't know.

Evan Meyer: 30:00

Well presented, well wrapped, and I also enjoy the bow.

Senator Roger Niello: 30:06

Well also the wrapping paper is kind of gray.

Evan Meyer: 30:11

Oh yeah. Like most things, that is a metaphor for life. The gray area, things are not black and white. There's nuance to everything.

Senator Roger Niello: 30:20

Yep.

Evan Meyer: 30:20

Critical thinking is required.

Senator Roger Niello: 30:22

Yes.

Evan Meyer: 30:24

Okay. I think our last question for today, because I wish I can do this for two or three hours with you, but that's not possible. So ai, how is this being discussed in the legislature from. Well first, how is it impacting the operations day to day, but also where do you see it going in the future, specifically around the legislature, the legislative process, and legislative operations? I.

Senator Roger Niello: 31:00

Well, in the legislature, the issue is how do you regulate it? I have said many times I have a lot of very talented, very smart colleagues, but frankly, we have 120 people here, 80 in the assembly, 40 in the Senate, who were probably the least. competent people to fully understand artificial intelligence and how to regulate it. I have not carried any artificial intelligence legislation myself I believe. So as not to discourage innovation if we're going to regulate it, we should regulate what it does, not how it's developed, and some of the legislative, efforts get into that latter area. And I think that controls it too much. But artificial intelligence is going to have a significant and profound effect on, on our econ economy, on social issues, in, in all sorts of ways. I think the job loss issue is probably overblown because we have had continual. Technological advances, especially over the last 150 years, that in human history is unprecedented. and in the western world it has done nothing but vastly improve and expand our economy. And I have a hard time believing that our artificial intelligence will be any better and. people that lament job losses to artificial intelligence. I say, and I didn't author this, I heard it from somebody else, so, I forget who, but it's, I believe it's true. You will not lose your job to artificial intelligence. You will lose your job to somebody who knows how to use artificial intelligence.

Evan Meyer: 32:56

I like that.

Senator Roger Niello: 32:57

incredibly valuable tool. I use it myself for, research purposes. There's several different platforms and it is a powerful tool that people should learn how to use. It will help businesses become more productive again. People won't lose their job to artificial intelligence per se, but to people who know how to use it

Evan Meyer: 33:18

Right.

Senator Roger Niello: 33:19

I'm the eternal optimist and I think it'll be like all of the other technical in innovations that we've had. Especially in the last 150 years and things will be better, but we do have to be careful. There can be there can be negative consequences.

Evan Meyer: 33:36

Yeah. You know, it's funny when every time there's like a big thing that's gonna disrupt something. There's always some, and this is a big one, I don't want to discount how big AI is, right? It's as big as, at least as big as, you know, it's the industrial revolution or the invention of the, you know, the internet or. Whatever, you know, agricultural revolution, the printing press, the steam engine, whatever, right? Like I, it's, it's that big and it'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 say to yourself, look, free and productivity. Beat Trump. All things that are free, that you can get for free if it can be for free. And things that are, that are, or almost free, we'll say, or, or things that are radically productive to make your day easier, to give you more information to help be more productive, as in your work, in your 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 we gonna do? We're all gonna lose our jobs. Well. You, you may lose your job because 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: 34:54

Learn how to use it and how it can be productive in your own life, both personally and from a business perspective.

Evan Meyer: 35:05

That's it. That's it. Well, I very much enjoyed this conversation. I'm grateful for your time, your expertise and and for sharing what you have here today. And this was wonderful. Thanks so much again. And any last words you wanna say to the world?

Senator Roger Niello: 35:25

The world.

Evan Meyer: 35:28

Communicate your last line of the world. What do you wanna see for the whole world? I.

Senator Roger Niello: 35:33

I wanna see peace. I'm troubled by things that are going on around the world, and I, I want to see peace. And I'd like to see a better balance of power in California. We'll see how the 2026 election turns out on that score in in California. And I'm up for reelection. It'll be my last one. I'll be turned out of the after that, but I'll be hopeful for, a little bit better balance of partisan power in the California state legislature. And I've enjoyed this too. And I'm glad that you reached out to me for something that had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with your podcast, but here we end up on your podcast. So I thank you for that.

Evan Meyer: 36:18

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: 36:25

Okay,

Evan Meyer: 36:26

All right.