In three years, California regulators will determine the type of tire you are allowed to buy in the Golden State. Taken alone, this might just be another wacky story about the Left Coast, but, unfortunately for residents, it’s a pattern that results in California ranking as the third-most expensive state in America, trailing only Hawaii and Massachusetts, with a cost of living almost 41% higher than the national average. By comparison, the cost of living in Texas is 9% below the national average.
In past years, California’s higher costs were often ascribed by Democrats to the “Weather Tax.” When people were flocking to the Golden State, that might have made sense—but more Californians have fled the state than Americans who have moved in from out of state since 1990.
The truth that Gov. Gavin Newsom, former Vice President Kamala Harris and other California Democrats don’t want you to know is that they’ve spent years outsourcing costly and unpopular policies to faceless, unelected bureaucrats. High costs are the predictable result of an unelected administrative state that layers costly mandates on every aspect of daily life, from the tires on your car to the trucks that deliver your goods to the very right to rebuild your home after a wildfire.
The latest example arrived on Aug. 19, when the California Energy Commission unanimously approved rules limiting what replacement tires Californians can buy. Starting in 2029, tires must meet strict rolling-resistance standards. Industry estimates suggest this could eliminate up to 70 percent of currently available tires, and jack the price of an average set from about $81 per tire to as much as $157—potentially adding more than $300 to the cost of outfitting a single vehicle.
Regulators claim the rules will save drivers a few dozen dollars in fuel over months. Reality: fewer choices and higher upfront costs in a state already burdened by the nation’s highest gasoline prices. Ominously, the spokesperson for the California Energy Commission emailed Ashley Zavala, the reporter who broke the story, soon after the story broke, and urged her to “(take) a different tone” with her piece. They didn’t dispute her cost estimate though.
Unfortunately, the tire diktat isn’t uncommon in California. Consider the California Air Resources Board’s Advanced Clean Fleets regulation. CARB is expanding its zero-emission vehicle mandate—originally aimed at government fleets—to private contractors who do any business with the state or local governments. Zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty trucks cost 132 percent more than their diesel counterparts, face multi-year delivery delays, and often require two or three vehicles to do the work of one conventional truck due to limited range. The result? Higher costs for every public contract, passed directly to taxpayers and ratepayers already struggling with California’s affordability crisis. Federal waivers for these rules have been withdrawn, yet the bureaucrats press on.
Then there is the California Coastal Commission, long known as one of the most unaccountable agencies in the nation. In one recent case, the Commission hit Carlsbad homeowner John Levy with a $2.4 million fine over locked gates (one of which the city had previously approved), vegetation changes, and an unpermitted pickleball court. The agency can impose daily penalties of more than $11,000 for years without meaningful judicial review upfront, and it has extracted nearly $50 million from property owners since 2016 while demanding public access features on private land. The Coastal Commission, packed with leftwing political cronies, practices regulatory extortion that chills investment and drives up housing costs along the shore.
Add to that the glacial pace of rebuilding after the January 2025 Pacific Palisades fire. Nearly 19 months later, fewer than a third of destroyed homes have received permits, and only about 1 percent have been completed. Even with supposed streamlining, median permit times hover around 97 days—far longer when Coastal Commission review kicks in for non-exempt parcels. Layers of environmental, geotechnical, and zoning rules, compounded by infrastructure bottlenecks, leave families in limbo while construction costs soar. Promises of “record-speed” recovery have collided with the same bureaucratic inertia that made California’s housing shortage a national scandal.
The preceding examples are features of progressive, albeit largely obscured by purpose, governance: Unelected boards and commissions write rules that elected politicians can then disavow when the pain hits voters. The pattern accelerated during COVID-19, when California’s prolonged lockdowns, school closures, and business restrictions devastated livelihoods while Texas and Florida prioritized openness and personal responsibility. The economic scars linger in higher unemployment, empty storefronts, and a state where even foreign migrants are increasingly choosing not to move to.
The human response has been decisive. For years, millions of Americans have voted with their feet, fleeing high-tax, high-regulation blue states for freer red ones. California has hemorrhaged residents—net domestic out-migration exceeding 1.4 million from 2020 to 2024 alone—with the largest single flow heading to Texas. New Yorkers have poured into Florida. The pattern continues: Californians and New Yorkers are seeking lower taxes, cheaper energy, more housing, and fewer edicts from distant bureaucrats. Texas and Florida have absorbed the bulk of this influx, delivering opportunity without the California regulatory cost premium.
Yet the left sees this exodus not as a warning but as a threat to its model. If people can escape California’s and New York’s costly regulations by moving to Texas or Florida, the political project fails. The solution, from their perspective, is to nationalize the pain. Use the federal government—through the EPA, national vehicle standards, energy mandates, tax hikes, and administrative rulemaking—to impose California-style costs coast to coast. Level the playing field by making Texas and Florida as expensive and constrained as the blue-state models they reject. No more competitive federalism—no more exit ramps.
This is the unspoken strategy behind endless federal climate rules, efforts to revive California’s vehicle standards nationwide, and progressive tax schemes. When state experiments produce results and people flee, the progressive response is forced uniformity.
Californians already pay the price in higher living costs engineered by regulators answerable to no one. The rest of America should refuse to import that model or vote for it on the national level. Freedom, affordability, and accountability still exist in places like Texas and Florida. The administrative state should not be allowed to erase the difference.
Chuck DeVore currently serves a chief national initiatives officer at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. He previously served in the California Assembly.