From Washington to Sacramento: Could Kamala Harris Run for Governor?

Image source: US Embassy in Montenegro

For the past eight years, California politics have been dominated for the most part by one person: our governor, Gavin Newsom.

Needless to say, Newsom has spent a long time making history. He rose to national prominence in 2004 for ordering city officials to recognize same-sex marriages, something unprecedented at the time. Newsom also briefly ran for governor in 2010 before bowing out of the race, backing then-Attorney General Jerry Brown and instead jumping into the race for Lieutenant Governor that year. He’s been in the headlines recently for calling for a special legislative session to, among other things, pass civil rights legislation, establish environmental protection laws, and enact further legislation to protect abortion access.

First elected in the 2018 “Blue Wave” in which Democrats won up and down the ballot, flipping the House of Representatives (including several districts here in California), Newsom beat Republican nominee John Cox by 23 points. Just three years later, Newsom was subjected to a recall attempt from voters in September 2021. Many at the time were frustrated over the state’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as a scandal where Newsom was spotted attending a dinner party at the French Laundry in the middle of heavy restrictions on indoor dining during a particularly brutal period of the pandemic for Californians. Nevertheless, the recall was resoundingly defeated by a similar margin to his 2018 victory, with 61.9% of voters opting to keep Gavin Newsom in his current position.

Given his successful re-election bid, this now means that Governor Newsom is term-limited and can no longer run for re-election. This has created a new opening in California politics, something that is rare considering how long many political figures in California stick around for, from the late Dianne Feinstein’s thirty-one-year tenure in the U.S. Senate, to Nancy Pelosi serving San Francisco in the House of Representatives since 1987, and recently announcing yet another bid for re-election in 2026.

Starting in March 2019, Politico reported that 3 statewide office holders — Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis, Treasurer Fiona Ma, and Controller Betty Yee — had announced their intentions to run for governor in 2026. Since then, Fiona Ma has dropped out of the race, and other candidates have entered the race. Similarly, a few others have been speculated to enter the race, particularly soon-to-be-former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and former candidate for LA mayor Rick Carusso.

I should go on the record here and say that, in my opinion, people (politicians) should really chill it with announcing their campaigns a year or two before the primaries. I feel, and I imagine that most voters feel, exhausted or overwhelmed by the campaigning starting earlier and earlier every election cycle. It’s not normal to announce your campaign seven years before the election. It’s simply not. I can only think of a couple of reasons as to why someone would assume it to be rational to make a campaign announcement public so far in advance, such as bolstering name recognition and gaining a fundraising advantage, given that campaigns of similar, and larger magnitudes take longer to put together. But just because they can do this doesn’t mean they should.

Since Vice President Kamala Harris was defeated in the 2024 election, some have debated what VP Harris’s next steps are. Some have speculated she might permanently retire, others think she might join the private sector after leaving her current position, and many have begun to float something relatively unheard of in California state politics, or American politics for that matter: a run for governor in 2026. Those who are big history nerds know that Richard Nixon ran for governor in 1962, having lost two years before to John F. Kennedy in the presidential election. Nixon’s run for governor was unsuccessful, but it didn’t take long for him to bounce back and win the presidential election six years later.

It’s not a bad idea, either. Kamala Harris already has the two things the other candidates lack: name recognition and a fundraising advantage. Practically everyone knows who Kamala Harris is at this point, whether they like her or not. VP Harris received 9 million votes alone in California. This also shows up in polling, with a recent poll from the University of California, Berkeley Institute of Government Services (Berkeley-IGS) showing that 46 percent of voters would be either “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to back a potential Kamala Harris bid for governor. VP Harris entering the race would probably clear any significant competition in the primaries as well.

It should be noted that Kamala Harris significantly underperformed President Joe Biden’s 2020 results, losing 2 million votes between 2020 and 2024. Additionally, Kamala Harris also underperformed in her 2010 and 2014 races for Attorney General when compared to people at the top of the ticket like Jerry Brown. We are also over a year and a half away from the primaries alone, and these numbers could change by then, which could influence whether or not Kamala Harris decides to run.

Harris has some of the progressive accolades that I think many Californians are looking for. During her run for president, one of the things the campaign focused on was a plan to build three million homes in four years, and to give first-time homebuyers $25,000 for their down payments. While she probably would not be able to roll out this type of policy at the state level because of opposition from many wealthy homeowners (also known as the “Not In My Backyard” or NIMBY crowd), that plan to increase supply and help prospective homebuyers still represents a step in the right direction to drive down housing costs and alleviate the deepening housing crisis in California. Harris could try to replicate that $25,000 payment to prospective homebuyers through some state-level program or by expanding whatever similar programs exist in California, but I think that that unless the “Yes In My Backyard” or YIMBY movement mobilizes to back proposals to significantly expand the housing supply, the NIMBY crowd will successfully block such measures at the state level.

After the great recession, then-Attorney General Kamala Harris fought for relief for homeowners, including reductions in interest rates and direct payments to families who lost their homes during the economic downturn. An estimated $9.2 billion USD was delivered to homeowners by reducing the principal on their first or second mortgages, according to CNN. If Kamala Harris does decide to run for governor, and is elected, she could potentially pursue similar actions on behalf of working families.

Needless to say, Gavin Newsom’s tenure has certainly been a very consequential one, and we’ll be feeling the effects of his decisions decades down the line here in California — such as his moratorium on the death penalty, which saved the lives of the hundreds of people currently on death row here in California and gave them another chance at getting out of jail. During his tenure, Governor Newsom also massively expanded healthcare access in California, something that will be felt by many for decades. Some of Governor Newsom’s policies have already been replicated across several states, and this trend is likely to continue as we head into a second Trump administration.

If Kamala Harris’s next step is to run, and potentially serve, as our next governor, then her time will no doubt be just as, if not more, consequential than Gavin Newsom’s. As our first female governor and our first governor of color, her tenure would be something for many to look forward to.

Harris serving as governor would also set her up to be one of the biggest faces of the resistance to Trump’s second administration, and potentially prime her for another bid in the 2028 Democratic presidential primaries.