Becerra and Hilton Clash in California Governor Debate

Published: 01 October 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online

Xavier Becerra and Steve Hilton clashed over taxes, immigration, artificial intelligence and the influence of Donald Trump during a tense televised debate that offered California voters a direct comparison between two sharply different approaches to governing the state.

The hour-long CNN debate on Wednesday came just days before election officials begin sending ballots to voters for the 3 November gubernatorial election. It was the first and only scheduled one-on-one debate between the Democratic and Republican candidates, giving both an important opportunity to make their arguments before voters in the country’s most populous state.

Becerra, 68, a former congressman, California attorney general and US health and human services secretary under President Joe Biden, presented his political experience as an advantage at a time when California is facing high housing and energy costs, pressure on public services and continuing disputes with the Trump administration.

Hilton, 57, a former Fox News host, British political adviser and technology entrepreneur, sought to present himself as an alternative to the Democratic establishment that has dominated California politics for years. He argued that long-standing state policies and regulations had contributed to high living costs and said voters should consider a change in direction.

The two candidates repeatedly returned to the question of affordability, one of the central concerns in the campaign. Hilton has made lower taxes and reduced regulation major elements of his platform. He has proposed eliminating state income taxes on earnings up to $150,000 and has argued that reducing regulatory barriers could encourage more housing construction and ease pressure on household budgets.

Becerra challenged the financial implications of Hilton’s proposals, arguing that major tax reductions would leave the state with difficult choices over funding for schools, healthcare and other public services. He said California’s affordability problems also had to be considered in the context of broader economic pressures, including federal policies and international developments affecting energy prices.

The debate also highlighted the continuing importance of Trump in California’s gubernatorial contest. Trump endorsed Hilton during the Republican’s primary campaign, helping consolidate conservative support behind him. Since then, Hilton has sought to emphasize his own political identity while arguing that California needs practical solutions rather than another cycle of partisan conflict.

Becerra repeatedly connected Hilton to Trump and the president’s policies. During a discussion about artificial intelligence, Becerra argued that Hilton’s approach reflected the Trump administration’s preference for less direct regulation of the technology sector.

Hilton responded by accusing Becerra of making Trump the centre of his campaign instead of addressing California’s domestic problems. He argued that voters were looking for action on living costs, housing, homelessness and government regulation rather than continued arguments about Washington politics.

Trump’s political standing in California has made the relationship particularly significant. The state remains heavily Democratic, and the governor’s race is taking place against a national political backdrop in which California has frequently opposed the Trump administration on immigration, environmental policy, technology regulation and other issues.

Artificial intelligence emerged as another important point of disagreement, although the candidates shared some common ground. Both indicated that California should regulate AI and data centres, reflecting growing concern over the technology’s impact on employment, energy demand, water resources and local communities.

Hilton argued that California should remain a major centre for the AI industry while ensuring that excessive regulation does not push companies and jobs to other states. He questioned whether Becerra would be willing to impose meaningful restrictions on a powerful industry that has contributed financially to political campaigns.

Becerra said AI regulation should focus on protecting workers and communities while allowing responsible investment to continue. He argued that new data centres should provide tangible benefits, including employment and infrastructure improvements, rather than placing additional pressure on local resources.

Immigration produced the most personal exchange of the evening. Becerra, the son of Mexican immigrants, challenged Hilton over his approach to immigration enforcement and accused him of supporting policies that would treat different groups of immigrants differently.

Hilton rejected the accusation and described Becerra’s remarks as unacceptable. He said his immigration policy would focus on removing people who commit serious crimes while reducing political confrontation over immigration.

The exchange reflected a broader disagreement over California’s relationship with federal immigration enforcement. Becerra has opposed the Trump administration’s deportation policies and has argued that California should protect immigrant communities. Hilton has said the state should cooperate more closely with federal authorities in cases involving people who pose a public-safety threat.

Hilton also attacked Becerra over his record as health secretary, particularly the federal government’s handling of unaccompanied migrant children during the Biden administration. Becerra defended the work of his department and rejected accusations that his policies placed vulnerable children at unnecessary risk.

The candidates also differed over voting rules. Hilton supported a proposed voter identification measure that would require identification for in-person voting, while Becerra opposed it and argued that such requirements could create additional barriers for eligible voters.

Both candidates, however, agreed on another major ballot issue: a proposed one-time tax on billionaires. The measure would impose a 5% levy on the assets of California residents with wealth above $1bn. Becerra’s opposition has put him at odds with some progressive figures who support the proposal, while Hilton has also rejected it.

The debate unfolded against a political landscape shaped by voter concerns about California’s high cost of living and the direction of state government. Housing affordability, energy prices, homelessness and public education have all emerged as significant campaign issues.

Hilton argued that years of Democratic control had produced excessive regulation and rising costs. He said his administration would seek to reduce bureaucracy, encourage housing construction and make California more affordable for working families.

Becerra countered that California’s economic problems could not be solved simply by cutting taxes and regulations. He presented himself as a candidate with experience in government who could work on housing, employment, healthcare and infrastructure while defending the state’s interests in its disputes with Washington.

The candidates also offered contrasting assessments of California’s political legacy. Hilton described himself as an outsider prepared to challenge the Sacramento establishment. Becerra argued that governing the state requires experience and familiarity with its complex institutions.

“There aren’t training wheels in the governor’s office,” Becerra said during the debate, arguing that the responsibilities of the position require someone prepared to take office immediately.

Hilton, meanwhile, maintained that Californians should not assume that established political experience automatically produces better results. His campaign has focused on voters dissatisfied with the state’s current direction and those seeking a significant change in policy.

The debate therefore became as much a discussion about political identity as individual policies. Becerra repeatedly framed the election around California’s relationship with Trump, while Hilton sought to make the contest primarily about the state’s cost of living and dissatisfaction with long-term Democratic rule.

With ballots soon arriving, the televised encounter gave voters a final major opportunity to hear both candidates directly before the November election. The debate did not erase the fundamental differences between them, but it clearly exposed the competing arguments that will shape the closing weeks of the campaign: whether California’s problems require continuity and experienced government leadership, or a substantial shift in taxes, regulation and the state’s political direction.

California voters will make that choice when they cast their ballots on 3 November, with the governor’s race unfolding alongside a broader national debate over the future of the Democratic Party, Republican politics and the role of states in responding to the Trump administration.