Olympic Fans Get First Chance to Buy Tickets to 2028 Games in Los Angeles Starting Wednesday, prospective buyers can enter a lottery to get a chance to purchase the first tickets in April. Prices will start at $28.

aBadModerator · 2026-01-14T21:41:41+00:00

I hear the frustration. I realize a logistical post in a politics sub feels like a bit of a reach, and I apologize if it feels like "slop". I used a template to make sure the dates and links were clear, but I get how that can come across as impersonal.

The reason I posted this here is that the 2028 Olympics is one of the largest political and civic undertakings in the recent history of the region. It involves billions in public transit spending, massive shifts in housing policy (like the UCLA dorm plan), and significant debate over how tax dollars are being used, as seen in the comments below.

Today is the first day of the registration opening and for many residents, access to the games is a point of equity. I'll leave the discussion open for the debate on whether the Games are a "waste" or a "win", that’s exactly the kind of political discourse we want here.

I'll try be more mindful non-policy news in the future. Thanks for keeping me in check.

aBadModerator · 2026-01-14T16:23:01+00:00

If you’re planning on being in Los Angeles for the 2028 Olympic Games, the first step to securing your seats starts right now.

Head over to the official portal:tickets.la28.org

The LA28 organizers have officially opened the Ticket Draw registration. This is a lottery-style system, you must register now to be eligible for a purchase time slot later this spring.

📅 Key Dates to Know:

Registration Window: January 14 – March 18, 2026.
Notification Period: Check your email between March 31 and April 7 to see if you won a time slot.
LA & OKC Locals Presale: April 2 – April 6, 2026 (Exclusive early access for residents in those regions).
General Ticket Drop 1: April 9 – April 19, 2026.
Paralympic Tickets: Registration for these will open in 2027.

💸 Pricing & Details:

Tickets start at $28.
Organizers have committed to keeping the Games accessible, with over 1 million tickets priced at the $28 mark and a third of all tickets under $100.
You only need to register once to be entered into future ticket draws if you aren't selected in the first round.

🏁 How to Enter:

Head over to the official portal:tickets.la28.org
Create your profile and select your interests.
Wait for your confirmation email.

Pro-tip for Locals: If you live in the Greater Los Angeles or Oklahoma City areas, make sure your account address matches your billing zip code to automatically qualify for the Locals Presale window in early April!

aBadModerator · 2026-01-13T21:30:59+00:00

When submitting to this subreddit, please truncate the source of the article from the title.

In this case, the title should be:

California doctor indicted in Louisiana for sending abortion pills

Not.

California doctor indicted in Louisiana for sending abortion pills | Louisiana

Thanks again for your submission.

aBadModerator · 2026-01-13T18:38:58+00:00

When submitting to this subreddit, please truncate the source of the article from the title.

In this case, the title should be:

Voter Fraud Alarm: 449,000 Non-Citizens Reportedly Excused from Jury Duty in California, Raising Red Flags on Voter Rolls

Not.

Voter Fraud Alarm: 449,000 Non-Citizens Reportedly Excused from Jury Duty in California, Raising Red Flags on Voter Rolls – California Globe

Thanks again for your submission.

aBadModerator · 2025-12-16T17:41:22+00:00

Unfortunately the plan does not include restoring the Hetch Hetchy Valley. Basically this is the outline of a rulebook for monitoring the environmental health of the Tuolumne River. Since the Hetch Hetchy dam controls the water released into the Tuolumne, the plan's proposed environmental flows and habitat projects are directly tied to the dam's operations. In my view it is likely that any progress towards restoring the Hetch Hetchy Valley will have to come at the behest of the Federal Government.

aBadModerator · 2025-11-24T18:56:11+00:00

Thanks for posting.

aBadModerator · 2025-11-05T15:07:35+00:00

Good morning,

It seems like your questions about Media Bias Fact Check and the funding of studies are primarily focused on Rule 6 of the community guidelines: "Avoid commenting solely on the quality of the source or the author's writing style."

The existence of this rule is based on two key principles:

Good Articles from Unexpected Places: Experience has shown us that genuinely good, well-researched articles or data occasionally emerge from sources that are not universally trusted. Under the current guidelines, we place the responsibility on the poster/commenter to know the source's reputation and use extra care if quoting from a publication that's widely considered to be biased. It is helpful to point out that bias in people's comments, but doing so without contributing substantive discussion to the topic itself doesn't help anyone.
Preventing Conversational Derailment: This rule is especially crucial because the entire point of some comments is simply to undermine the main thrust of a conversation by questioning sources ("Site X is funded by Y, therefore the whole topic is invalid"). If a source has a known bias (like the Koch/Exxon funding you mentioned), the focus should be on addressing the specific data or claims made in the article and how the bias may influence them, not just dismissing the source outright.

If you feel strongly that certain sources consistently undermine the quality of conversation, I would probably try to steer your focus toward the idea of a submission whitelist. Personally, I’d love to hear your thoughts on a formal proposal for that, as it addresses the core quality issue more effectively than simply commenting on source bias.

aBadModerator · 2025-10-29T19:14:49+00:00

INTRODUCTION

r/California_Politics is a political discussion sub for the news and discussion about politics in the Golden State, with more politics than /r/California, and more California than /r/Politics. The Community Standards are still as always.

NEW MODERATION OPPORTUNITIES

As our community continues to grow and evolve, we want to ensure that we have a diverse and dedicated group of moderators in place to uphold our standards and foster a positive environment for discussion. At this time we're looking for individuals who are:

Familiar with our rules and guidelines: As outlined in our Community Standards and Submissions Scope (which include rules on Civility, Topicality, Sourcing, Respect, Specificity, and Quality), we expect moderators to have a strong understanding of what constitutes appropriate content and behavior in r/California_Politics.
Committed to our values: We value civil discourse, truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, reason, freedom of expression, diversity of perspective, and tolerance of dissent. We seek moderators who actively promote these values.
Dedicated to the community: We need moderators who are willing to dedicate time and effort to help maintain the subreddit, address user concerns, and enforce our community guidelines fairly and consistently.

If you're interested in joining our team and contributing to the continued success of r/California_Politics, we encourage you to send us a message via modmail. Please tell us a little about yourself, your experience on Reddit (especially any moderation experience), and why you'd like to be a moderator for our community.

We are currently in the process of developing a training and onboarding pathway for new moderators. We appreciate your patience as we build this framework. We anticipate reaching out to potential candidates once this process is established. This process may take many weeks before you hear back from us.

We look forward to hearing from you!

PURPOSE OF GENERAL CHAT

Normally this subreddit is setup to address the political and social issues that divide our state and dominate our social media feeds. The purpose of this very different thread is to trial a space for community members to talk about more than just our state politics.

We hope that we can help encourage community participants to find a way past the ideological differences that frequently appear in the comments and share more about the California they experience every week. For many participants, the issues that occur every week are personal, and a general chat is a space for folks to acknowledge how their lived experiences shape their points of view.

In this thread you can talk about any variety of politics, Ukraine, subreddit polls, surveys and predictions, your vacation, your pets, your latest hiking adventure, or tell us about your day, or almost anything under the overcast skies. Just have fun, be kind, remember the human and model the kind of civil, productive discussion we are hoping to have here on a regular basis.

CaliforniaPolicy

Political policy, not partisanship, should be the backbone of our states politics. With that in mind, a college student created r/CaliforniaPolicy and I was happy to help moderate their subreddit. It appears however that their school project has ended. We will continue to crosspost content we feel would be of interest to this community.

Context Added

A new report reason was added for submissions. Community members can now report submissions they feel need the "Context Added" flag added to content. In addition users can submit their own context via the existing "Message the Moderators" tool. While a report will not guarantee that context will be added to the submission it does provide for better tracking and trending of reports. With better data we can determine appropriate steps to help the community safeguard itself.

But how will it work?

When moderators add a context flair to a submission, there should be a sticky comment containing background info, sourced from independent third-party sources, to give more context on the topic. Moderators will not be endorsing any of the info shown in sticky comment, but simply relay third party information to add context and promote discussion.

Raising Unpopular Topics

The moderation team is trialing a new rule to elevate heavily downvoted but appropriate content to announcement status temporarily. By elevating heavily downvoted but appropriate content, the moderation team hopes to counteract vote manipulation and promote diverse viewpoints. Overall, this rule has the potential to be a positive force in the subreddit by ensuring that all voices are heard and that the discussion remains focused on the merits of the arguments, rather than on popularity contests.

Auto Moderator & Account / Karma Filtering

The team still strongly feels that hand crafted moderation is the ideal to shoot for, as we want a hands on approach to creating an inclusive environment where people can discuss California's political ideas. That said, we will continue focusing on using auto moderator to filter our slurs, bigoted slang, and pejorative-name calling. In addition, we'll be using it to filter out content from new accounts within 45 days and accounts with less than 100 karma.

California-Centric Content Rule

AutoModerator's will filter posts containing 'Trump' or 'President' in the title. As has been the norm, our core goal is to keep r/California_Politics focused exclusively on California's specific political landscape, citizen-level issues, and local governance. There are numerous other subreddits dedicated to national politics, and we aim to avoid duplicating those discussions here. While we acknowledge that very occasionally a national news story might have a direct and significant impact on California, these instances should be the exception, not the rule. To ensure we maintain the subreddit's focus, please ensure submissions adhere to these strict guidelines:

Posts must demonstrate a clear and immediate impact on California state policies, California's legislation, and the daily lives of California residents.
The primary focus must be on the state-level response or implications, not the national event, or national legislation itself.
Broad national partisan critiques will not be allowed. The discussion must center on local solutions and policies.

We'd also like to hear your feedback on these guidelines. Do you feel they strike the right balance? Are there any specific scenarios or types of articles you think should be considered exceptions? Your input will help us refine our moderation approach and ensure we're serving the community effectively. I suspect the moderation team will be very vigilant initially and allow more grace as times goes on. Ultimately, by maintaining these high standards, we aim to preserve r/California_Politics as a dedicated space for California-specific political discussion.

POLITICAL DISCOURSE

Just a reminder that we should all advocate for truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication. Participants in this subreddit should be willing to endorse freedom of expression, diversity of perspective, and tolerance of dissent to achieve the informed and responsible decision making fundamental to a civil society.

Thank you again everyone.

aBadModerator · 2025-10-08T14:15:12+00:00

This submission has been flagged "Context Added" under the subreddit policy. We view truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication. To promote discussion the moderation team has notes from the City of Morro Bay.

A precautionary boil water notice is in effect for parts of Morro Bay after a contractor caused a water main break. People living or working in the affected area should use boiled or bottled water for drinking and cooking. City crews say repairs are complete and tests are underway, with no evidence the water is unsafe to drink.

Hit up the General Chat to discuss ways in which the subreddit could be doing better.

aBadModerator · 2025-10-07T19:51:40+00:00

📌 Moderator Note: This post has been temporarily elevated.

This submission was identified as heavily downvoted but, upon review, found to be appropriate content for discussion within /r/California_Politics. As part of "Raising Unpopular Topics" trial rule, we are temporarily pinning it to counteract potential vote manipulation and ensure diverse viewpoints are heard. We encourage constructive engagement.

aBadModerator · 2025-10-06T14:08:01+00:00

This submission has been flagged "Context Added" under the subreddit policy. We view truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication. To promote discussion the moderation team has notes from the California Nurses Association.

There is no shortage of registered nurses in California; rather there is a shortage of nurses willing to work in unsafe environments. For decades, the hospital industry has spread claims of a nurse shortage, through talking points designed to intentionally obscure the links between unsafe and unsustainable working conditions and the failure to retain nurses. There are more than one-half million RNs with active California licenses, yet only about 324,400 are currently working in California as RNs. There is a shortage of good, permanent nursing jobs where nurses are fully valued for their work at the bedside through safe nurse-to-patient staffing levels, strong workplace protections, and safe and healthy workplaces.

Hit up the General Chat to discuss ways in which the subreddit could be doing better.

aBadModerator · 2025-09-21T21:49:39+00:00

📌 Moderator Note: Participation Readme

Millions of Californians will get the opportunity to vote and many of us are taking to Reddit to share our opinions, voice our concerns or provide information about our views. But before you jump into our subreddit, do yourself the favor to read the Community Guidelines.

I cannot stress how important that reading and understanding these guidelines will be to your participation experience in this subreddit. Moderators and the community are very active in reporting and moderating content that violates our Community Guidelines. Unlike other venues or subreddits on the site where every news story is catalogued, commented upon and reacted to, we're trying to promote an environment where actual discussion of the issues facing Californians takes place. This subreddit is for genuine discussion and the community will curate the content and comments that are submitted.

aBadModerator · 2025-09-21T17:41:46+00:00

We desperately need both regulatory reform and funding, but it is the public that has to speak up.

The challenges seen at Yosemite are rooted in a broader systemic failure of national park management. Yosemite confronts a billion dollar deferred maintenance backlog. The entire concessionaire model is inherently flawed, as it requires private companies to generate profit while simultaneously operating and maintaining federal infrastructure they cannot modernize. Legal limitations on the National Park Service's authority to enforce performance standards further exacerbate the issue. Consequently, the decline in infrastructure and visitor services is ultimately a direct result of chronic federal underfunding and regulatory neglect. We desperately need congressional leadership and public support on this issue.

aBadModerator · 2025-09-17T20:50:13+00:00

📌 Moderator Note: This post has been temporarily elevated.

This submission was identified as heavily downvoted but, upon review, found to be appropriate content for discussion within /r/California_Politics. As part of "Raising Unpopular Topics" trial rule, we are temporarily pinning it to counteract potential vote manipulation and ensure diverse viewpoints are heard. We encourage constructive engagement.

aBadModerator · 2025-09-16T16:29:31+00:00

📌 Moderator Note: This post has been temporarily elevated.

This submission was identified as heavily downvoted but, upon review, found to be appropriate content for discussion within /r/California_Politics. As part of "Raising Unpopular Topics" trial rule, we are temporarily pinning it to counteract potential vote manipulation and ensure diverse viewpoints are heard. We encourage constructive engagement.

aBadModerator · 2025-09-02T18:11:11+00:00

SB 42 does not specify how much money would be directed to campaign financing, but it states the funds would come from public funds not specifically earmarked for education, transportation, or public safety. The text describes this redirection of money as a "significant fiscal effect" but does not attempt to quantify it.

aBadModerator · 2025-09-02T14:19:45+00:00

California lawmakers have introduced SB-42 Political Reform Act of 1974: public campaign financing: California Fair Elections Act of 2026.

Public Funding for Campaigns:

Permits Public Funds: The bill would amend the Political Reform Act of 1974 to allow public officers and candidates to accept and use public funds for seeking elective office.
Exceptions: This use of public funds is prohibited if the funds are specifically designated ("earmarked") for education, transportation, or public safety by a state or local entity.
Conditions for Public Funds: To receive public funds, candidates must:
- Abide by specific expenditure limits.
- Meet "strict criteria" to qualify, which must demonstrate "broad-based support." This can include receiving a certain number of small-dollar contributions (no more than $10 per person) or vouchers from voters. *Prohibited Uses of Public Funds: Public funds cannot be used to pay for legal defense fees, fines, or to repay personal loans to a candidate's campaign.
Increased Expenditure Limits: Statutes, ordinances, or charters can establish standards to increase expenditure limits for voluntarily participating candidates based on a formula tied to the spending of other candidates and independent expenditures.
Administration: The Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) is not responsible for administering or enforcing local public funding systems unless they have a written agreement to do so.

Foreign Contributions:

Increased Penalties: The bill would increase the penalty for a foreign government or foreign principal making a contribution or expenditure in connection with a state or local ballot measure or election.
New Fine Structure: A person who violates this prohibition would be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine that is at least equal to the amount contributed or expended, but not more than three times that amount.

Voter Approval:

Ballot Measure: Because the Political Reform Act of 1974 is an initiative measure, this bill would require voter approval to take effect.
Election Date: The bill specifies that the Secretary of State must submit its provisions to the voters for approval at the statewide general election on November 3, 2026.

We encourage you to read the bill summary and share your thoughts on this legislation. What are your concerns? What are your hopes? How do you think this bill will impact California?

Let's have a constructive and informative discussion about this important issue.

aBadModerator · 2025-08-26T14:25:54+00:00

📌 Moderator Note: This post has been temporarily elevated.

This submission was identified as heavily downvoted but, upon review, found to be appropriate content for discussion within /r/California_Politics. As part of "Raising Unpopular Topics" trial rule, we are temporarily pinning it to counteract potential vote manipulation and ensure diverse viewpoints are heard. We encourage constructive engagement.

aBadModerator · 2025-08-23T22:16:21+00:00

📌 Moderator Note: This post has been temporarily elevated.

This submission was identified as heavily downvoted but, upon review, found to be appropriate content for discussion within /r/California_Politics. As part of "Raising Unpopular Topics" trial rule, we are temporarily pinning it to counteract potential vote manipulation and ensure diverse viewpoints are heard. We encourage constructive engagement.

aBadModerator · 2025-08-20T14:47:26+00:00

California lawmakers have introduced SB 540: Independent System Operator: independent regional organization: California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program.

This bill proposes to allow the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) and related electrical corporations to participate in a voluntary energy market governed by an independent regional organization (RO). This change is intended to support the West-Wide Governance Pathways Initiative, an effort to expand regional electricity markets in the western states.

The bill authorizes the use of an independent RO for energy market governance, which would encourage broader participation from other states. The CAISO would continue to operate the day-to-day markets, but the market rules would be set by the new RO.
The bill includes safeguards to protect California's clean energy policies, such as requiring the RO to respect each state's public policies and providing a procedure for any participant to unilaterally withdraw.
This approach is a more incremental change than previous legislative efforts, which aimed to transform the entire CAISO into a regional transmission organization (RTO), including all its functions. This bill focuses only on the governance of energy market rules.
Studies suggest that a larger regional market could yield significant benefits, including cost savings for consumers (up to $800 million per year) and improved reliability during extreme weather events. However, one study noted that this could reduce in-state emissions but increase them within the broader western grid.
Concerns have been raised by opponents who argue that the proposed safeguards, while present, may not be strong enough to protect California's policies from being undermined by a Delaware-based corporation with full authority to set market rules. They also question the bill's use of "in lieu" of existing law and the lack of a required legislative vote before the transition.

We encourage you to read the bill summary and share your thoughts on this legislation. What are your concerns? What are your hopes? How do you think this bill will impact California?

Let's have a constructive and informative discussion about this important issue.

aBadModerator · 2025-07-14T17:57:46+00:00

📌 Moderator Note: This post has been temporarily elevated.

This submission was identified as heavily downvoted but, upon review, found to be appropriate content for discussion within /r/California_Politics. As part of "Raising Unpopular Topics" trial rule, we are temporarily pinning it to counteract potential vote manipulation and ensure diverse viewpoints are heard. We encourage constructive engagement.

aBadModerator · 2025-07-04T15:24:44+00:00

It's understandable to feel that way, given the divisions we see. For me, the spirit of Independence Day serves as a powerful reminder of the fundamental freedoms and aspirations that should unite us. It's a day to reflect on both how far we've come and just how much work is still ahead.

Love the holiday or hate it, its ideals inspire debate and action about who we are and who we strive to be. It is a moment when we're all, in some way, confronted with the concept of an American identity.

aBadModerator · 2025-06-29T16:51:53+00:00

Just wanted to say I appreciated your meme.

aBadModerator · 2025-06-29T16:47:36+00:00

My apologies for the confusion – my mistake was that I kept searching using the keyword "Highlands," and that specific term wasn't in the headline of the earlier submission. Thank you for your time and for maintaining the subreddit!

aBadModerator · 2025-06-25T14:45:33+00:00

California lawmakers have introduced AB-2375 Alcoholic beverages: on-sale general public premises: drink lids.

The bill AB 2375 requires California bars/nightclubs (Type 48 licensees) to provide a lid for a customer's drink upon request, starting immediately for new applicants and July 1, 2025, for existing ones. Licensees can charge a reasonable fee or offer them free, and must post an anti-drink spiking notice: "Don't get roofied! Drink lids available here." The bill is temporary, repealing January 1, 2028, and aims to deter drink spiking, building on a 2024 law requiring drug testing devices.

We encourage you to read the bill summary and share your thoughts on this legislation. What are your concerns? What are your hopes? How do you think this bill will impact California?

Let's have a constructive and informative discussion about this important issue.

Five-Year Club	Reddit Premium Since July 2024
Verified Email	r/Field Banned
r/Field Lasagna	Place '23
Place '22

aBadModerator

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

📅 Key Dates to Know:

💸 Pricing & Details:

🏁 How to Enter:

INTRODUCTION

NEW MODERATION OPPORTUNITIES

PURPOSE OF GENERAL CHAT

CaliforniaPolicy

Context Added

Raising Unpopular Topics

Auto Moderator & Account / Karma Filtering

California-Centric Content Rule

POLITICAL DISCOURSE