Gov. Newsom’s Office Continues To Receive Backlash Over Attacking A USC Professor

Backlash against Governor Gavin Newsom for disparaging a USC Professor who said that California would be facing a 75% increase in the price of gas after closing refineries continued on Monday, with state lawmakers joining in the criticism of the Governor.

Last week, USC Professor Michael Mische warned that gas could hit as high as $8.42, or a 75% in price, thanks to the pending closure of two key Californian refineries. In his report, he found that California could be facing a gas deficit of  6.6 million to 13.1 million gallons a day if the refineries close, with a likely increase happening as soon as this summer. He also warned of ripple effects affecting virtually every industry in the state.

“California can ill afford the loss of one refinery, let alone two,” said Mische. “Multiple models indicate that the shutdown of the two California-based refineries could possibly place the Golden State in a precarious economic situation and create a gasoline deficit potentially ranging from 6.6 million to 13.1 million gallons a day, as defined by the shortfall between consumption and production. Reductions in fuel supplies of this magnitude will resonate throughout multiple supply chains affecting production, costs, and prices across many industries such as air travel, food delivery, agricultural production, manufacturing, electrical power generation, distribution, groceries, and healthcare.

“The estimated average consumer price of regular gasoline could potentially increase by as much as 75% from the April 23, 2025, price of $4.816 to $7.348 to $8.435 a gallon by calendar year end 2026. We can expect retail prices to be even higher in counties such as Mono and Humboldt.”

The Newsom administration, who have been touting electric cars and for the state to wean away from oil and natural gas since coming into power in 2019, responded quickly. In a statement on X, they quickly attacked him, claiming he was being paid by Saudi Arabia and that he was mainly guessing.

“Apparently, all it takes to make headlines these days is publishing an unsourced “study” by someone bankrolled by Saudi Arabia utilizing the scientific method of “guessing’ … Would encourage reporters to check sources before lending your outlet’s credibility”, posted the Newsom Press Office. “This is why it’s important to check your sources. The author of this 1.5-page “study:” – Was on the payroll of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia – Openly admits there is no methodology, just “author estimates” and rough approximation.”

However, the response was widely seen as acting out against the study simply because it didn’t adhere to California’s climate goals and that it only added salt to the wounds of their currently failing gas-powered car and truck 2035 sales bans. With the backing of the Trump administration, Republicans and some Democrats in Washington, the EPA waiver protecting the California 2035 car mandate has already passed the House and is currently facing a Senate vote soon. And the electric truck ban was repealed on the day the study came out. As climate and emission initiatives were Newsom’s signature programs, their failure in Washington, and the 2035 car mandate likely to be done away with soon as well, make the refinery issue critical, hence his office’s response last week.

The response didn’t elicit any praise though. Mische fought back, saying that while he did work with Saudi Arabia, it was through their Vision 2030 program to help diversify their economy beyond oil.

“Allegations have been leveled as to being an ‘agent’ of, working for or on behalf of, and being ‘bankrolled’ by Saudi Arabia,” countered Mische. “Nothing could be further from the truth, and the allegations are patently inaccurate and without substance and merit. For the record, my work in Saudi Arabia had absolutely nothing to do with petroleum, and I received no payments from any Saudi petroleum company or any oil company. My Vision 2030 work involved steering the Saudi economy away from fossil fuels.”

Over the weekend, Newsom’s office continued to see backlash, with it escalating to lawmakers on Monday. Some argued against Newsom’s response and defended Mische by simply explaining basic economics.

“Rather than engaging with the data or addressing Californians’ growing concerns about affordability, Governor Newsom is targeting an academic professor simply because he doesn’t like the conclusions,” said Senator Brian Jones (R-San Diego). “This kind of petty politics and slanderous attack is not statesmanlike. Californians deserve better than a governor who hides behind communications staffers while attempting to discredit and slander respected experts.

“If the Governor believes Professor Mische’s projections are flawed, there’s a better path: ask the many highly-paid experts within his own administration. The California Independent System Operator, appointed by Newsom himself, has the background and independence to weigh in on the basic economics of gasoline supply and demand. As the ISO would likely affirm, the closure of two in-state refineries would reduce supply and, logically, drive up prices. That’s not bias, it’s basic economics.

“When did telling the truth become a fireable offense in California? Instead of silencing experts and spinning the facts, Governor Newsom should be listening to the warnings. Discrediting a respected academic doesn’t change the facts. It only exposes how desperate this administration has become to avoid accountability. Newsom is clearly scared that California’s skyrocketing gas prices will tank his presidential ambitions, so he’s trying to bury the truth instead of fixing the problem. America is watching.”

As of Monday afternoon, Newsom’s office has yet to give another response on the issue.