Can the Republican Party come back in California? Don’t laugh. With the GOP winning big in New Jersey and Virginia, the prospect of a GOP revival in the biggest of the blue states has moved a few notches from fantasy to reality. True, Barack Obama carried 61% of the state’s vote in 2008 (four more percentage points than in New Jersey), but Democrats have their problems and the Republicans may have an issue they can run with.
The Democrats’ big problem is that the state is a mess and the debacle has happened on their watch. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is nominally a Republican but he has governed as an independent, as often at odds with Republicans as with Democrats. The Legislature, which has produced the laws and budgets responsible for the state’s fiscal woes, has been solidly Democratic in both houses for decades. The Democrats could use some fresh faces to draw voters’ attention away from their failures. Instead, their most likely candidate at this point is former Gov. Jerry Brown, the same Jerry Brown who was young, hip and unconventional as governor from 1975 to 1983 but is none of those things now. He’s just a great fundraiser, and has so far scared away any serious opposition.
The Republicans have at least a real primary race in the works. Three credible candidates are in the race. Two of them, Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner and former eBay CEO Meg Whitman, have plenty of money. A third, former Congressman Tom Campbell, has experience, deep knowledge of the budget, some name recognition and a knack for campaigning on the cheap with social media. All are social moderates to a degree – pro-choice in a pro-choice state. None seems to have views that would scare independents, who now make up 20% of the state’s registered voters.
But the Republican Party’s real strength in 2010 may be on the issues and on one in particular, public-employee pensions. The state’s huge and growing obligations to retired government workers – estimated by Schwarzenegger at up to $300 billion – are raising alarms even from Democrats and have spurred talk of ballot initiatives. (To get a taste of what makes people mad, you can go here and scroll through a database of the more than 3,000 retired teachers and 6,000 former state and local government employees who get $100,000 or more each year.)
The issue is not exactly new. It was serious enough for Schwarzenegger to give reform a shot in 2005, only to pull back when a poorly-drafted proposal appeared to threaten the pension payments of firefighters’ widows and orphans. But events of the past year have given it new urgency and may have weakened the power of police, prison guards, firefighters and teachers to shout down any reform proposals.
First, it’s now clear that the state’s budget crisis this year was more than just an acute reaction to the economic cycle. California has a chronic fiscal imbalance, built into its tax code and expansive spending commitments. Second, the strapped taxpaying public may be reaching the end of its patience for a state that has largely protected its workers (who are forced into unpaid furloughs but are losing no benefits) when roughly 12% of California’s workforce is looking for a job. The tactics that killed pension reform four years ago, when the state and its residents were enjoying a burst of prosperity, are less likely to work today.
Pensions are not the only topic on the table these days. There’s serious talk of holding a constitutional convention for the first time in well over a century. But more focused reformers aim for something less drastic and unpredictable. Scaling back retirement benefits for new public employees looks like an idea whose time has come. The California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility, founded in 2007 by a Republican former assemblyman, Keith Richman, hopes to have an initiative on the ballot next year. Websites have sprouted up to chronicle pension issues and energize reform movements in California and other states. Schwarzenegger has proposed rolling back new-hire retirement formulas to levels in effect before 1999, when the Legislature and Gov. Gray Davis lowered the age for full benefits from 60 to 55.
So far it has mostly been Republicans pushing back against public pensions, though the state treasurer, Democrat Bill Lockyer, recently said the pension system “will bankrupt the state” if it isn’t fixed. In the same breath he also said it’s “impossible for this Legislature” to solve the problem, thereby hinting at the reason why most Democrats are joining him in sounding the alarm. The Democratic Party in California is simply too beholden to public-employee unions to take them on directly. And it can thank Jerry Brown, among others, for this state of affairs. As governor, Brown signed bills that established card-check collective bargaining for state employees and teachers, leading the state’s public-sector workforce to become one of the most unionized in the nation. A 2008 UCLA study found that 57% of government workers in the state were union members, compared to 37% for the U.S. as a whole. With numbers came power and, through dues, money to influence elections, especially in Democratic primaries. Whatever the individual views of their members, public-sector unions now arguably make up the most powerful special interest in the Democratic base.
That’s bad news for a Democratic Party entering a gubernatorial election year with Brown as its likely standard-bearer and a growing public disgust with the governing class. Republicans could gain from a voter revolt as long as they can get on the voters’ side before Democrats do. That will require some reworking of the GOP style and image, though not of its long-held principles. After all, it was only in the last 10 years or so that California Republicans started looking like a dying party of aging white voters obsessed with illegal immigration. Long before that, it was the party of limited, competent and, most of all, honest government. This was the party that, in the early 20th Century, attacked special-interest politics with the initiative, referendum and non-partisan local elections. Voters might cheer the re-emergence of such good-government politics. The pension issue is about the state’s pocketbook, of course. And indirectly it is about taxes. But it is even more deeply about the integrity of government, which ought to put all taxpayers first, not just those lucky enough to work for it.
16 responses so far
1 BoolaBoola // Nov 10, 2009 at 3:35 am
And what, pray, do you think the Republicans will do when they get true legislating power (assuming they keep the governor’s office)?
Fire the government-workers? (In Palo Alto they’re not issuing traffic tickets–can’t afford to pay the cops to do that. And traffic tickets are a cash-cow, bring in way more than they cost. If they’re cutting that….) Stop paying for the UC campuses? That means handing the hi-tech advantage off to other states.
What else? Find a way to raise taxes in spite of Prop 13? On what?
If the Dems are suffering because of what’s happening on their watch (and no way is it their fault–California is triply vulnerable to national and global recession, as the most international state, the most speculative/cutting-edge state, and the Prop 13-state = property-tax rates frozen since I was wearing long hair), just you watch and see what’s gonna happen on the Republicans’ watch.
“So nimm meinen Segen,
Republican-Sohn!
Was tief mich ekelt,
dir geb’ ich’s zum Erbe,
der Democrat-heit nichtigen Glanz:
zernage ihn gierig dein Neid!”
as the fellow said.
2 sinz54 // Nov 10, 2009 at 6:49 am
BoolaBoola:
Tom Campbell has proposed a 15% give-back of salary from all government employees.
In this current bad economy, everybody EXCEPT public employees has had to sacrifice. Many have lost their jobs (unemployment rate 10.2%). Many have agreed to wage give-backs (like the auto workers). Yet public employees have sacrificed little or nothing, apparently.
Campbell would make sure that public employees have to sacrifice too. Good for him!
3 teabag // Nov 10, 2009 at 8:06 am
Maybe if the CA GOP stopped being 100% obstructionist things would go a little better in CA.
However it’s what the GOP do best. Delay, distort and distract. If they can they will. The End
4 oldgal // Nov 10, 2009 at 9:33 am
I would have a real problem voting for anyone whose pledge to Grover Norquist or any other ideologist, no matter which party, comes before their pledge the the citizens of California. I need to see candidates who understand that any state budget is better than no state budget and are willing to compromise to make this happen on time. It is, apparently, too much to ask for candidates who are willing to work with the other side to come up with a solution.
5 ottovbvs // Nov 10, 2009 at 9:44 am
…….Er…..isn’t Arnie a Republican?…….much of CA dysfunctionality is the consequence of Republican obstruction and the promotion of ballot measures that have been enormously destructive of the Californian political process. Brown is a political pro unlike Arnie and is very likely to be elected I would have thought. It’s not the governorship that needs to be fixed in CA it’s the entire system and Brown needs to address this in his campaign.
6 Tzal // Nov 10, 2009 at 9:45 am
sinz54 — I represented the California Department of Corrections in a suit brought by a few inmates. I was up at Pelican Bay State Prison a few months ago. They are cutting dozens (perhaps more than 100) jobs in just that facility. I’d say losing your job is a bit of a sacrifice, no? But the cuts don’t stop there. Don’t forget the statewide furlough program.
California is ungovernable.
7 LFC // Nov 10, 2009 at 10:13 am
The Legislature, which has produced the laws and budgets responsible for the state’s fiscal woes, has been solidly Democratic in both houses for decades.
Actually, it’s minority party obstructionism, much like the U.S. Senate. If the GOP takes control, do you think the Dems will be more amenable to giving them exactly what they want after decades of being told “no” at every turn? Paybacks are a bitch. Without a super majority, nothing can get done … and the governed suffer for the cause of political gamesmanship.
This was the party that, in the early 20th Century, attacked special-interest politics with the initiative, referendum and non-partisan local elections.
I thought it was ballot initiatives and referendums that were the main cause of California’s budget to be unmanageable, not laws explicitly passed by the legislature and signed by a governor. So if you are saying the GOP takes credit for this system, it tells me that they don’t know how to govern.
It would be interesting, though, to see either party stand up and tell the people of California that they can’t directly govern the state, and the system of passing laws and rules by popular vote was through. It’s the right thing to do, but I can’t imagine it would be politically possible.
8 Tzal // Nov 10, 2009 at 10:24 am
LFC — About a decade ago a friend of mine argued that California should scrap its proposition system. I was stunned by this suggestion. SHOCKED! that anyone would recommend dismantling direct democracy.
But he was right. The problem is that there is no way to scrap the system and un-do the damage done by the various propositions short of a constitutional convention.
9 ottovbvs // Nov 10, 2009 at 10:33 am
Tzal // Nov 10, 2009 at 10:24 am
“I was stunned by this suggestion. SHOCKED! that anyone would recommend dismantling direct democracy.
But he was right.”
………Of course he was right……..popular sovereignty over the nuts and bolts of governing is a superficially attractive but actually totally destructive way of proceeding……..and CA is the proof.
10 SpartacusIsNotDead // Nov 10, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Tom Gray wrote: “The Democrats’ big problem is that the state is a mess and the debacle has happened on their watch. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is nominally a Republican but he has governed as an independent, as often at odds with Republicans as with Democrats. ”
I guess in 2012 Republicans will be arguing that Bush was nominally a Republican, but since he ruined everything it’s not really appropriate to consider him a Republican.
When did fantasy become a substitute for thoughtful analysis?
11 Reason60 // Nov 10, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Actually, as a CA resident, I agree that the proposition process has been hijacked by special interests, to become a corrupt method of governing.
the endless lists of propositions have carved our protected budget items, which means that the state government actually has little control over budgeting; add to this mix the refusal of Republicans to raise taxes and the refusal of Dems to cut programs, and you end up with deadlock.
I am not optimistic about either party- Campbell’s notion of cutting employee pay is a bumpersticker, not a policy. If we want to truly balance the budget, we have to cut the scope of what government does; and that is the hardest thing, because that would mean cutting things that are popular.
A look at the state budget shows that the single biggest expenditure is for health services; cutting these services would mean in many cases, cutting off the medical care that people rely on. Cutting cost in the abstract is very nice, and wins applause lines at Rotary Club luncheons, but the republicans would be much less popular once they were faced with videotape of senior citizens getting evicted onto the street when their program gets cut.
Basically the trouble at the state level is the same as at the national level- neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are willing to face the painful choices that budgeting requires; so the deficits continue to grow, and they both pretend the solutions are simple, “if only the other side were not being so stubborn”.
12 DFL // Nov 10, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Jerry Brown will be responsible for California shortly. Let he and the Democrats deal with the dire mess in Sacramento. Republicans should just criticize from the outside and pounce when appropriate.
13 sinz54 // Nov 10, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Reason60:
OK. What is the second biggest expenditure?
The third biggest?
I’m guessing that somewhere in there, highway maintenance and construction is extremely expensive, given CA’s massive network of freeways. The answer is simple. Convert them to toll roads, and use the toll revenues to help balance CA’s budget. This would also have the desirable side effect of discouraging unnecessary driving, reducing smog and reducing America’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions.
14 pnwguy // Nov 10, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Sinz54:
I lived in CA for a few years and travel there monthly on business trips. I would venture that in that top 3 or at least top 5 of state government expenditures are PRISONS. But that’s a different topic.
I am all for user fees when they can be efficiently and fairly collected. It’s a way to internalize costs that markets can’t otherwise allocate. But, freeways in CA aren’t isolated highways with great distances between exits, like the northeastern turnpikes and tollways you may be familiar with. These are the major arterial highways for travel all throughout urban areas. Retrofitting them for any sort of toll collection system is a MASSIVE and expensive undertaking. Many of the large bridges collect tolls, but they have natural choke points with only a single entrance and exit.
Fuel excise taxes do a pretty good job of allocating a lot of highway costs with minimal collection overhead. CA could simply raise them. But since they are called TAXES instead of user fees, the usual anti-tax groups will oppose them.
15 SFTor1 // Nov 10, 2009 at 11:05 pm
California, of which I am a resident, has become pretty much unmanageable.
The fixes as far as I can see: get rid of Prop 13 (the biggest problem of which is undertaxation of commercial buildings) redistricting (the State is gerrymandered like you won’t believe), getting people out of prison. (the latter will require curbing the power of the prison guards union.)
California demographics do not favor the GOP. DFL’s suggestion that the party should continue playing spoiler is probably the sad reality, and will continue to sour Californians on the once proud GOP.
16 Demosthenes // Nov 11, 2009 at 5:40 pm
In order to regain power, the California GOP has to start running candidates that actually have a chance of winning. The only Republicans that can win today are moderates, but the California GOP is entirely run by the “teabagging” right wingers, so are loathed by Independents and Democrats. Until the GOP consistently runs moderates, they will remain a small minority party.
You must log in to post a comment.