Fact check: Here’s what was true, false and almost true at the California Senate debate

The debate between four candidates vying for a California U.S. Senate seat heated up fast and never cooled off — mostly as the three House Democrats started going after Republican Steve Garvey.

Reps. Adam Schiff, D-Burbank, Katie Porter, D-Irvine, and Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, debated alongside retired Los Angeles Dodgers and San Diego Padres star Garvey.

The four candidates are among many vying to succeed Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who died this fall, in two elections for the solidly-Democratic seat.

There is a special election to fulfill the rest of Feinstein’s term, which ends January 2025, and the full six-year term to start after. The top two vote-getters, regardless of party, in the March 5 primary go on to the November election. Whoever wins the special election will be sworn in as soon as possible.

Gov. Gavin Newsom appointee Sen. Laphonza Butler, D-Calif., is serving in the interim. Butler, 44, declined to run in either Senate race.

Schiff, 63, is leading in recent polls. He is trailed by Porter, 50, and Garvey, 75. Lee, 77, is a little further behind.

The debate, moderated by Politico and FOX 11 Los Angeles at the University of Southern California campus, featured the four top candidates in a recent Politico/Morning Consult poll.

Here is some of what wasn’t so true:

Are most Californians losing money?

Early in the debate, Garvey made a claim that 88% of Californians feel that they are either losing money or breaking even. He did not follow up on those remarks, and his spokesman did not respond to The Bee’s inquiry on the subject.

According to a November 2023 survey from the Public Policy Institute of California, nearly two out of three Californians expect bad times in the next 12 months — that includes 89% of Republicans and 70% of independents, but just 47% of Democrats.

That same survey found that 82% of Californians view the lack of well-paying jobs as a problem in the state. Despite that, 72% of Californians reported being satisfied with their household financial situation.

Did California lose 1 million people?

Said Garvey, “California has lost 800 to a million people who’ve walked the pain, middle class people, because they can’t start new businesses, small businesses.”

That’s vague — without the time frame, it’s unclear what he’s pointing to.

California’s population shrunk by about 75,423 between 2022 and 2023, according to estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau (from 39,040,616 to 38,965,193).

Since 2020, California lost more than half a million people — 573,030, according to U.S. Census Bureau estimates, (the population was 39,538,223 then).

Is there a committee that deals with housing in Congress?

“Did you know there’s not even a housing committee in the United States Congress?” Porter said. “It’s just a subcommittee of banking.”

That’s false. The House does not have a specific housing committee, but the Senate does: the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.

Do earmarks shortchange California?

Porter said, “The earmarks process actually shortchanges California, the data show that diverse districts and diverse states actually get half as much money. We only get two senators, which means every state gets two sets of earmarks.”

Actually, California has the largest congressional delegation of any state, because earmarks happen in both chambers. Whichever party is in power tends to have more projects prioritized.

Earmarks have been a target of conservatives for years because of controversy over projects that seemed wasteful. Critics cite the proposed 2005 allocation for the Alaska “Bridge to Nowhere,” which connected the city of Ketchikan to an island with the city’s airport and 50 residents.

Congress banned earmarks in 2011. They were resurrected in 2021 and rebranded as “community project funding.” They are specific dollar amounts for local projects that are included in spending bills.

Members of Congress now have to disclose their requests publicly, explain why the project is needed and certify neither they nor their families had any financial stake in the projects, and each is sent to congressional committees for review.

Did Adam Schiff cash checks from Big Oil?

Toward the end of the debate, Porter dug into Schiff over his financial support from the oil industry.

“Rep Schiff may have prosecuted big oil companies before he came to Congress, but when he got to Congress he cashed checks from companies like BP, from fossil fuel companies,” she said.

According to the website OpenSecrets, Schiff collected more than $401,000 from the energy and natural resources industries between 1999 and 2024. By comparison, Porter collected just over $163,000, according to OpenSecrets.

Schiff responded, saying “Well first of all, I gave that money to you, Katie Porter.”

The Schiff campaign cited a Politico report that Schiff has raised or contributed more than $200,000 for Porter since she first ran for Congress in 2018.