Dagen McDowell opened a recent clip from Fox Business’ The Big Money Show with the blunt reality California drivers already live with: the state has the most expensive gasoline in the country, and lawmakers are now warning prices could climb even higher.
She didn’t pin it on one single thing at first. Instead, she framed it like a slow-motion squeeze – less refining capacity, heavy policy pressure, and a state that seems comfortable living with permanently higher costs.
Then the show cut to Max Gorden, standing outside a closed Phillips 66 refinery in California, using the shutdown behind him as the visual proof of what the panel was talking about.
Max Gorden Shows The Math Behind The Closures
Max Gorden told Dagen McDowell that the Phillips refinery he was standing near shut down back in October. When it was operating, he said, it accounted for a little more than 8% of California’s refining capacity.
That number matters because California is not a place where you can easily “make up the difference” overnight. When a big chunk of supply disappears, the market doesn’t politely shrug.
Gorden said another closure is coming in 2026. He reported that a Valero refinery in Benicia is set to close in April, and that facility accounts for just under 9% of the state’s refining capacity.
In other words, the state is staring at back-to-back hits that together represent roughly a sixth of refining capacity – depending on how you slice the numbers and what else changes between now and then.
Gorden also said Republican lawmakers are blaming “overregulation” of California’s oil and gas industry for the situation. The point wasn’t subtle: when you make it harder to operate, companies eventually stop operating.
He then played a clip of California Congressman Vince Fong, who emphasized that this isn’t only California’s headache. Fong said Arizona and Nevada also get gasoline from California, and he noted that governors from those states – “bipartisan,” in his words – have expressed concerns about what he called the “crippling” of energy infrastructure.
That’s the ripple effect the rest of the country sometimes misses. California isn’t just a big consumer market; it’s also a regional fuel hub, and when its supply chain tightens, neighbors feel it.
Why California’s Gas Is Different – And Why It Costs More
Max Gorden laid out the side-by-side comparison: California’s gas prices versus the national average. He didn’t just say “California is expensive,” he explained why the gap exists.
Gorden pointed first to taxes. He said California gasoline is taxed at a high rate, and that alone widens the spread between California and many other states.
Then he explained something that’s easy to overlook: California gas is literally different. Because of strict air-quality and environmental standards, he said, the gas sold in California must be a cleaner-burning blend than what’s sold elsewhere.
That special blend can function like a built-in vulnerability. If the state’s supply gets disrupted, you can’t always swap in the exact same product from anywhere at any time without logistical and regulatory friction.
Gorden also noted that drivers haven’t been fully hit with the most extreme price spikes lately for a couple of reasons: dropping oil prices and increased oil imports into California have helped “shield” consumers from the worst of it.
Still, “shielded” doesn’t mean safe. It just means the pain could have been worse, and the next supply crunch might not be as forgiving.
Gorden said President Trump floated a possible solution: increase oil drilling off the California coast to boost supply and push prices down.
But Gorden added the plan got pushback from environmental groups and from Governor Gavin Newsom, who called the idea “idiotic.”
Even if people agree with Newsom on offshore drilling, the larger point is unavoidable: when you reject one supply option, you’d better have another ready to replace it – or accept higher prices as the trade.
The Panel Argues Over The Exodus – And Calls It “Capitalism”
Back in the studio, the panel’s tone shifted from reporting to argument.
Taylor Riggs said she didn’t hate what was happening, and she framed refinery closures as a market response. Riggs called it capitalism and said money goes “where it’s treated best.”
When Brian Brenberg pushed back – basically asking if she really meant she didn’t mind refineries leaving – Riggs doubled down. She argued a state can’t force a business to operate there if the business climate isn’t friendly.
Marcus Lemonis jumped in with a personal angle. He said he once had a “tiff” with Gavin Newsom and claimed he decided never to open a retail business in California because the taxes and regulations make it too hard to make money.
Lemonis called fuel prices a “microcosm” of what happens in California more broadly. In his telling, it’s the same playbook everywhere: labor costs, regulations, and the inability to turn a profit push businesses away.
Jackie DeAngelis took a slightly different angle. She said she doesn’t have a problem with a refinery closing if it doesn’t work financially, and she described the choice as dollars-and-cents driven.
But DeAngelis also pointed out the political tension underneath it: if enough voters keep electing leaders who support the same policies, then high prices are not just an accident—they’re the predictable outcome of choices the electorate continues to make.
She compared it to New York, saying some people stay, pay the taxes, vote the same way, and accept paying more at the pump and more at the store than people elsewhere.
Then she went bigger, suggesting the country’s geographic map is becoming more polarized: blue-state voters gravitate to blue states and accept higher costs, while others move to red states seeking a different policy mix.
Whether you love that theory or hate it, it explains why these debates never end. People aren’t just arguing about gas – they’re arguing about what kind of place California is allowed to become.
Brian Brenberg’s “Crazy Gas Facts” And The EV Fairness Fight
Brian Brenberg came in with a stack of numbers and a punchline.
He said California used to import about 6% of its “petro needs” in 1982 and now imports 64%, calling that shift “crazy.” The implication was clear: the state is more dependent on outside supply than ever, even as it makes local production and refining harder.
Brenberg also said the gas tax that pays for roads is 61 cents a gallon, and he mentioned California gas around $4.39 per gallon while claiming a big chunk of the price—he said 26%—is taxes of various kinds.
Then he took aim at the equity argument he says California leaders like to make. Brenberg argued that drivers of gasoline cars pay the road-related gas taxes, while EV drivers use the roads but don’t pay that same fuel tax.
He called that a fairness problem and suggested the state should fix what he described as policy hypocrisy. Even if someone disagrees with his tone, the underlying question is legitimate: as EV adoption rises, how does a state pay for roads when fewer drivers buy taxed gasoline?
That’s not a culture-war issue. It’s a math issue, and states that don’t solve it will end up scrambling later with fees, mileage taxes, registration hikes, or some mix of all three.
Dagen McDowell Calls Gas Taxes “Regressive” And Remembers A Newsom Text
Marcus Lemonis circled back to DeAngelis’ point that people choose to live that way. He said, in effect, if residents don’t like the taxes or fuel costs, they can leave, because others will take their place.
But Lemonis also raised a sharp contradiction: he said California has a deficit and receives federal funds, and he questioned at what point the federal government might say it doesn’t agree with state policies.
DeAngelis responded with a line that sounded half-joke, half-serious: she said she’d “yank it from every state,” referring to federal funds.
Dagen McDowell then made her argument personal, saying people often ask why she doesn’t just move away. She said her job is in New York and the industry doesn’t really exist elsewhere in the same way.
Then she cut to what she sees as the moral core of the gas-price problem. McDowell called gas taxes “regressive,” saying they hurt the working poor more than anyone else.
She also referenced a Wall Street Journal story about Chevron CEO Mike Wirth, describing how he tried to contact Gavin Newsom before moving Chevron’s headquarters from San Ramon to Houston.
McDowell said Wirth texted Newsom wanting to talk before the announcement, and Newsom’s response, as McDowell recalled it, was essentially: “I don’t need to talk about it. I’m good.”
Even taking that as an anecdote relayed on a talk show, the message is chilling for business leaders: if the state’s top political figure signals he doesn’t care whether large employers stay, companies will plan accordingly.
McDowell also argued that importing oil from far away – she singled out Iraq in her comments – creates more pollution from transportation than necessary. That’s a point that tends to make everyone mad, because it suggests environmental goals can collide with environmental outcomes.
Where This Leaves Drivers
What’s striking about the panel’s discussion is that nobody pretended this is an easy fix.
Max Gorden presented closures as hard numbers, not vibes: two major facilities, two big percentages of capacity, and a state that already prices fuel at the top of the national list.
Taylor Riggs framed the exodus as rational behavior in a hostile business climate. Marcus Lemonis backed that up with his own refusal to operate in California.
Jackie DeAngelis focused on the electorate and the political feedback loop that keeps producing the same outcomes. Brian Brenberg hammered the tax burden and the long-term road funding problem.
And Dagen McDowell brought it back to the human impact: when policy choices make fuel permanently expensive, it’s not rich people who feel it first. It’s workers, families, and small businesses that can’t “opt out” of commuting, deliveries, and daily life.
If California keeps losing refining capacity while keeping a unique fuel blend, high taxes, and limited options to expand supply, “most expensive in the country” stops being a headline.
It just becomes the normal way of life – until something breaks, and prices jump again.
Gary’s love for adventure and preparedness stems from his background as a former Army medic. Having served in remote locations around the world, he knows the importance of being ready for any situation, whether in the wilderness or urban environments. Gary’s practical medical expertise blends with his passion for outdoor survival, making him an expert in both emergency medical care and rugged, off-the-grid living. He writes to equip readers with the skills needed to stay safe and resilient in any scenario.
