Who Replaces Feinstein?

California Gov. Gavin Newsom says he won’t appoint anyone running for her seat in 2024.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom listens to New College students at Betty J. Johnson North Saraota Public Library in Sarasota on Monday, April 3, 2023. Ivy Ceballo/Tampa Bay Times via ZUMA Press Wire

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has a tough decision to make: who he’ll appoint to temporarily replace the Senate vacancy created by the death of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who served in the upper chamber for more than three decades and wielded enormous influence over firearms policy, judicial selections, and more until her death Thursday.

Three Democratic members of Congress from the state have already announced their bids to replace Feinstein in 2024: Rep. Barbara Lee, a liberal who has served in Congress since 1998; Katie Porter, a rising star in the progressive coalition who was first elected in 2018; and Adam Schiff, who rose in prominence managing former President Donald Trump’s first impeachment trial, and as a member of the committee investigating the January 6 Capitol insurrection.

But Newsom is unlikely to pick any of the three for the interim. Earlier this month, the governor said he didn’t want to give anyone an advantage in next year’s primary should Feinstein be unable to finish her term. “It would be completely unfair to the Democrats that have worked their tail off, he said on NBC’s Meet the Press as Feinstein publicly battled health issues. “That primary is just a matter of months away. I don’t want to tip the balance of that.”

His decision is complicated by a 2021 promise to name a Black woman to replace Feinstein should she leave the Senate early. That promise came after he appointed Alex Padilla to fill the vacancy left by Vice President Kamala Harris, who was the only Black woman in the Senate.

Lee, who is Black, was incensed by Newsom’s comments. “I am troubled by the governor’s remarks,” Lee said in a statement. “The idea that a Black woman should be appointed only as a caretaker to simply check a box is insulting to countless Black women across this country who have carried the Democratic Party to victory election after election.”

“The perspective of Black women in the U.S. Senate is sorely needed—and needed for more than a few months. Governor Newsom knows this, which is why he made the pledge in the first place,” Lee continued. “If the Governor intends to keep his promise and appoint a Black woman to the Senate, the people of California deserve the best possible person for that job. Not a token appointment.”

According to recent figures from the University of California, Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies, Lee is polling at 7 percent for the March primary, behind Porter’s 17 percent and Schiff’s 20 percent. 

There are several other Black women currently serving in key political positions across the state, but to fill the vacancy, many would have to give up hard-fought positions or would lose footing on others for which they’re vying.

The office of former House Rep. Karen Bass, now mayor of Los Angeles, has said she isn’t interested in being a temporary Senator, according to the Washington Post. Bass only recently won office in the city after a very expensive campaign against billionaire Rick Caruso.

Meanwhile, San Francisco Mayor London Breed is running for re-election in what some local experts say will be a competitive race; Breed has endorsed Lee for the 2024 Senate primary. 

Lateefah Simon, a member of the San Francisco Bay Area Transit Board, could be another candidate, but the appointment would complicate her campaign to replace Lee in representing California’s 12th District. California Secretary of State Shirley Weber would have to give up her job, which could run through 2030 if she is re-elected.

While Newsom weighs his options, the Democrats’ narrow 51-49 Senate majority is down to 50.

Newsom “wants to be respectful and not name somebody while folks are still grappling with their grief,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), according to a recent Politico report. Nevertheless, Kaine said, “We cannot afford to be one down. We really can’t.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate