The California Difference



After the resounding victory of Democrats for statewide offices in California, Senator Boxer's victory, as well as the imposition of a will contrary to that of Republicans on important propositions such as 23 and 25, commentators and analysts are asking about and analyzing the differences between California and the rest of the country.

To begin to explain the difference, let me begin by stating that California has finally elected an intelligent and well qualified Governor. Let us remember that when Arnold Schwarzenegger was first elected Governor, he was a right wing activist, would often say idiotic things, and had no political experience. I give him credit for learning on the job and transforming himself. He broke ranks with conservative Republicans, so much so, that during budget negotiations reporters would say that he acted more like a Democrat, than a Republican. The vast majority of bills that he signed into law, were written by Democrats, including the most historic and significant piece of legislation, for which he will be remembered, AB 32, which was written by Fran Pavley and Fabian Nuñez. California changed Arnold.

Then along comes Meg Whitman sounding exactly like the old Arnold used to, as the brilliant political ad below demonstrates. Since she had the same campaign director as Arnold did in 2003, Pete Wilson, it's not surprising. They were probably coached by the same people as well.

After 7 years of Arnold Schwarzenegger as Governor, 8 years of George Bush as President, and 2 years of Barack Obama as President, to whom can Californians attribute responsibility for the general economic downturn in California and the 12.4% unemployment rate? It should be obvious that a far more profound process is taking place, and the proposition that Meg Whitman was somehow uniquely qualified to turn things around for California and reduce the unemployment rate because of her experience as CEO of Ebay is ludicrous. For people who believed that, I have bridge I would like to sell them.

Jerry Brown on the other hand, is intelligent, visionary, and experienced. He is the best qualified candidate to be elected Governor in my lifetime.

The difference is that California is the most populous state in the nation, and has very large urban concentrations, such as Los Angeles county, and the San Francisco Bay Area. Our urban experience gives us a different insight. The premise upon which the Meg Whitman campaign was based on is an insult to my intelligence and, I'm sure, to the intelligence of millions of Los Angeles county and San Francisco Bay Area residents. Remove Los Angeles county and the San Francisco Bay Area from the equation, and California is surprisingly conservative.

To further explain the difference, one thing that I can state with certainty, and I believe the vast majority of Californians would agree with me, is that the American economy will never improve unless it reduces its radical oil dependence. Yet, I have never heard or read a single proposal formulated by a Republican that would do that. In fact, they take the opposite perspective, as exemplified by the motto many of them have adopted, "Drill, Baby, Drill," their willingness to act against the scientific consensus on important issues such as climate change, and the irrational and impractical position which is nearly universal among them, of being against any and all tax increases. In California, dozens of Republican state legislators even went as far as signing a pledge stating such opposition.

Such an irrational and impractical position would impede Republicans from ever funding the mass transit our society direly needs, yet the vast majority of the industrialized world has per capita oil consumption rates which are 40 to 60% below that of the United States, primarily due to mass transit.

There is a common perception that Republicans have trouble attracting Latino votes, particularly in California, with which I agree. However, there are those who point out that Republicans don't have trouble attracting Latino votes in Florida or Texas. We must acknowledge the very real differences that exist between the two largest latino groups in Florida and California, i.e. Cubans and Mexicans, but also that the population of Los Angeles county and the San Francisco Bay Area is larger than the entire population of Florida and is about 70 to 75% of the population of the entire state of Texas, depending on which statistics are used.

San Francisco, Los Angeles, we are a revolution! Onwards towards making mass transit the primary mode of transportation in the state and decriminalizing marijuana.

The Aftermath

California was in no mood to approve short term solutions yesterday as the map demonstrates. Mainstream politicians have not brought before the voters fundamental changes to our socioeconomic structure such as the ones I discussed in yesterday's entry, because they are perceived as politically inviable. Voters have demonstrated that the short term solutions they were asked to approve are not politically viable either. It will be interesting to see how politically viable the cuts in programs and social services which are now being threatened will be, and what effect they will have on the society in the context of a plummeting economy. The opportunity for real changes is the best when the society has collapsed, or is perceived as being on the verge of collapsing. May Californians see the light and transform their socioeconomic structure which is neither ecologically, nor economically sustainable, and which I would characterize as sadomasochistic.

The Useless Election

Today, California is voting on six initiatives that have all been placed on the ballot by the state legislature. Among them, proposition 1A extends recently passed tax increases for two additional years. Three of them combined will raise $6 billion dollars through borrowing and redirecting money, thus reducing the projected budget deficit to $16 billion from $21 billion. A mass of mainstream politicians including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa support the measures which were the result of the most overdue budget in state history. The Los Angeles Times endorsed all of them except 1B. Five out of six are expected to lose and the measure with the most minimal impact, limiting pay increases for legislators if there is a budget crisis, is expected to pass.

I have not been paying much attention until very recently, don't plan to vote, and have taken the time to learn about the propositions out of curiosity. The measures are largely short term solutions that avoid fundamental changes the state needs to make, such as reforming proposition 13, which Arnold Schwarzenegger has explicitly opposed in the past. Borrowing $5 billion from future lottery earnings essentially relies upon the same logic as borrowing $15 billion to fix the budget problem in 2004. Except now the problem which Arnold Schwarzenegger pledged to fix when first elected is worse than ever. According to the election material provided by the Secretary of State of California, "Even with the adoption of the 2009-10 budget package and assuming that all of the propositions on this ballot pass, it is expected that the state would face multibillion-dollar budget shortfalls in the coming years."

Yet Arnold Schwarzenegger has never considered taking the advice of his economic advisor in 2003, Warren Buffet, to repeal or reform proposition 13. Neither have the voters been asked to approve a reform of this measure, even though a reform of this measure is ostensibly of mutual interest to the Governor and the average Californian. The proposition capped property taxes and created an unfair property tax system which contributes to the budget crisis, shortchanges the education system and local governments, and creates housing scarcity and higher housing costs.

We've also never been asked to vote for universal healthcare, even though bills have been introduced in the legislature in the past. We've never been asked to fund the mass transit system our state direly needs, and we've never been asked to vote for publicly financed elections. We've never been asked to make the fundamental changes which are necessary to create a fairer and more sustainable society.

California collects most of its revenue from the personal income and the sales taxes. During what is being referred to as the most severe recession since the 1930s, revenue from such sources will fall more precipitously than revenue from property taxes. The palpable sudden loss in wealth, power, and prestige that the U.S. is undergoing is the sound of the empire crumbling. California must transform itself and not allow itself to be buried under the rubble by perpetuating a system which is regarded as malfunctional .

The election is as useless as Arnold Schwarzenegger as Governor. He pledged to fix the budget problem, now its' worse than ever. He denied that California had a revenue problem, but instead had a spending problem. The current drastic conditions have changed his mind. He began as a right wing advocate, only to confront defeat, and subsequently move further and further to the center until now he's just about the same as the man he replaced, Grey Davis.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is historically important not just because he's a movie star married to a Kennedy, but also because he broke with the Anglo-saxon hegemonists. During newscasts covering budget negotiations anchors and reporters have commented, "Arnold is not acting like a Republican, he's acting more like a Democrat." Every significant piece of legislation which he has signed during his governorship is virtually guaranteed to have been written by a Democrat. The most historically important perhaps being AB 32, The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which was not only written by Democrats, but by a Mexican! Fabian Nuñez and Fran Pavley coauthored the bill. What awaits us after Arnold is perhaps the first Mexican governor of California since Pio Pico.