Biggest winners and losers of suspense day

Did someone forward you this email? Sign up here.

Hello and welcome back to Capitol Confidential. Suspense file hearings may be over, but that doesn’t mean it’s fully behind us. The ripple effects from dozens of bills’ sudden deaths will continue to reverberate, while scores of other bills are now moving to consequential floor votes with notable amendments. In all, Senate and Assembly appropriations committees killed more than 230 bills – more than a quarter of all bills subject to fiscal committee review – by holding them in suspense file limbo.

As we all nurse our proverbial suspense file hearing hangovers, here’s a rundown of where some of our most-watched bills stand today.

One of the most contentious bills of the year, AB1776, has made it past a crucial milestone. 

Assembly Member Cecilia Aguiar-Curry’s antitrust bill, named the COMPETE Act, made it off the suspense file after the Senate Appropriations Committee added an amendment cutting a provision that dogged her in committee hearings. 

The bill would substantially expand the Cartwright Act, a landmark regulation that governs California’s antitrust enforcement, by allowing legal action against single-firm business accused of engaging in anticompetitive practices. Existing law requires there be two businesses engaging in monopolistic behavior to be subject to antitrust enforcement. 

The initial version of the bill also allowed individuals to challenge companies in court over alleged anticompetitive behavior, further expanding the breadth of enforcement options. But that ability, known as the “private right to action,” became a flashpoint in committee hearings, and added fuel to opponents’ concerns that it would overload the courts with a glut of lawsuits. 

Now, that provision has been cut, leaving the COMPETE Act a significantly more pared down version of its former self. 

Aguiar-Curry had indicated in hearings she was willing to amend the bill to meet legislators’ concerns, but in a news release said she was “disappointed” private right to action, or PRA, was “gutted.” Still, she said she backed the bill with the changes

“We’ve been trying to modernize our antitrust laws for decades, and I worry we’ll be waiting 10 or 20 years before there’s another opportunity to give Californians the level of protection they would have had under a PRA,” Aguiar-Curry said. “But I’m proud of this effort so far and look forward to continuing our work to pass this important legislation to protect our California small businesses and working families.”

The next test is whether the amendment is enough to temper critics and the concerns of some fellow Democratic legislators who were wary about the now-nixed provision.

AB1720, which would have limited the price of resale tickets for concerts, plays and other live shows in California to 10% over the original purchase price, has met its end. 

The anticlimactic appropriations decision comes after Assembly Member Matt Haney, D-San Francisco, made a theatrical last-minute pitch for his bill at a music venue and nightclub in downtown Sacramento on Tuesday. 

Named the California Fans First Act, AB1720 aimed to tackle ticket speculation – an issue that has sparked several high-profile lawsuits and motivated several other state legislators to introduce similar efforts.

“It’s not surprising that a bill designed to put power back in the hands of fans, artists, and venues faced opposition from an industry that profits from speculation and artificial scarcity,” Haney said in a statement less than an hour after the fatal vote. 

LiveNation, the massive ticket seller that was found guilty of operating an illegal monopoly in the primary ticket market, supported AB1720. Those opposing the bill included StubHub and SeatGeek. 

But a related bill, AB1349, passed through suspense. Authored by Assembly Member Isaac Bryan, D-Los Angeles, the bill would ban “speculative ticketing,” in which sellers on the secondary market offer a ticket they don’t yet have in hand.

First it was $23 billion. Then it was $12 billion. Now, upon amendments from the Assembly Appropriations Committee, Wiener’s science bond measure is a $5 billion proposal. 

The embattled bill, which failed to secure enough support to make it to the November ballot, is meant to backfill science research funds after cuts from the Trump administration. But the effort is still in play to place the measure on a future ballot, and is now moving on to the floor.

“We have a chance to build the next generation of affordable food solutions, protect our communities from wildfires, and provide hope to millions of families struggling with diseases that have no known cure,” Wiener said in a news release shortly after the hearing on Thursday. “We have to seize it and pass a strong science bond for the people of California.”

Legislators have until Aug. 21 to negotiate bill amendments, and until Aug. 31 to pass all bills. 

California is one step closer to joining the likes of Australia, the United Kingdom and France in banning social media use for kids under 16. 

AB1709 by Assembly Member Josh Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, passed through appropriations on Thursday. It included new amendments to “to clarify scope of the e-Safety Advisory Commission and make conforming changes,” according to Senate Appropriations Chair Sabrina Cervantes, D-Riverside.

The bill would ban social media companies from allowing children under 16 to create accounts on platforms with features defined as addictive, including notifications, endless scrolling, algorithm-generated feeds and autoplay. It would also create an advisory commission (the aforementioned e-Safety Advisory Commission) within the California Department of Justice to help implement the bill.

Questions? Thoughts? Interesting tidbits to share? Reach out at [email protected], and follow me on X, @KathrynPlmr.