California's no longer the golden state

I was born in California. I'm old enough to remember how proud I was when the state passed New York to become the most populous in the nation. It was a good thing to be from California--home of great universities, Disneyland, the Pacific Ocean and surfing, Hollywood, and the Byrds (OK, I had to stick that in there). But the wheels have come off since the golden days in the Golden State.

In the first decade of the 21st century, California's population grew by only 10%, the smallest population growth in its history as a state. It will not gain any seats in Congress or electoral votes for the first time in its history. Much of its population growth in the last 10 years came from immigration from Mexico, both legal and illegal. For the first time, California had a net outflow of population among American citizens. Think about that--people who have the means are getting out of the state.

What happened? All of California's natural assets are still here. Its climate is just as wonderful, its resources as abundant, its agricultural productivity as great, its infrastructure as developed. The answer lies, as you probably have guessed if you've read any of my earlier blogs, in politics.

Lefties and their allies have persistently put roadblocks in front of those who wanted to get ahead in this state. The environmental movement has become harsh and strident. It threatens to strangle the state's economy in a crazy and confusing monstrosity of regulations. The state's vast oil and natural gas potential on the continental shelf has been off limits for years. Environmental groups and others have become masters at tying up economic development in court.

But that’s not the only reason for people to give up on California. Non-environmental regulations have mushroomed as well. It can take months to obtain permits to open even the simplest business. Is it any wonder that the state's unemployment rate, 11.7%, is one of the country's highest?

I think the biggest cause of California’s dysfunction has to do directly with its politics. Let’s see . . . who runs the state government? Oh yeah, Democrats. And not your run-of-the-mill variety. Out here we have grown a lethal, spend-crazy, anti-business, out-of-touch-with-reality set of politicians who see more taxes as the solution to all problems. An ever-growing political class, largely funded by public service unions, has hugely increased the size and cost of government. California now has among the highest tax rates in the country as well as some of the greatest budget deficits.

It’s pretty discouraging now to live in California. No quick solution exists. My guess is that it will take severe economic conditions to wake up the voters, who will then toss out the entire dysfunctional legislature and start over.

Is California Waking Up to the Problem?

Recently The Wall Street Journal ran a piece on the huge uproar over taming the public unions, which are bankrupting so many local and state governments. Of course, we know about Wisconsin, but I was amazed to read that even here in California, an increasingly liberal and out-of-control blue state, things are changing for the better when it comes to the feeding frenzy of the public unions.

According to the Journal, some people in California, which now has a huge deficit of 26 billion dollars, are starting to wake up to the problem. For example, Costa Mesa, in Orange County, just fired half of its work force. Days later, Los Angeles reached a tentative deal in which workers would pay more into pension and health plans.

Then there's San Francisco, about the last place in California you would expect to find an official determined to fight the financial weight of its public unions. But the man taking on the unions in San Francisco is its Public Defender, Jeff Adachi, who runs an agency of lawyers that provide legal services to poor people. He is a card-carrying San Francisco Democrat. Why is he worried about public union costs? As he sees it, payments for public pensions and health care are defunding social programs and the entire network of support services.

Last year he got up an initiative, Proposition B, which would have required current workers to pay more toward pension and health-care costs. He got some surprising help. For example, he got financial support from a prominent local Democrat, Mike Moritz of Sequoia Capital. California's most famous living Democrat, former Assembly Speaker and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, supported him. He collected 76,000 signatures. Even though Prop. B lost by 13 points beneath a mudslide of public union money, Adachi is retooling his proposition for another vote this November.

This is not the only good news from San Francisco. A few weeks ago, a small group of current and former municipal officials and taxpayer advocates in the San Francisco Bay Area convened to form California United for Fiscal Reform.

Its co-chairs are Adachi and Stephanie Gomes, the outspoken city council member from Vallejo, famously the largest California city to declare Chapter 9 bankruptcy. Their first meeting this month attracted representatives from Menlo Park, Pleasanton, Contra Costa County, and Sonoma County. The Journal quotes Gomes as saying, "These costs are a tsunami. If we can't rely on the state to fix it, we have to do it locally, and we have to join together, because the unions are joined."

The message is reaching other areas of the state too. In Orange County, the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility and the Pacific Research Institute recently held a "Pension Boot Camp," where some 175 elected officials and others heard talks such as, "What hasn't Calpers [the state’s public-employeee retirement system] told you?"

The catch is that much of these retirement systems are protected from cutbacks due to constitutional mandates. That means the lead on major reform would have to come from the mercurial Gov. Brown. He talked about it in his campaign, but not much since.

But the Journal reports that high-level help for the embattled locals may come from another California official, U.S. Congressman Devin Nunes. Rep. Nunes is building support for his Public Employee Pension Transparency Act, which would require states and municipalities to produce a coherent picture of their pension obligations. Imagine that. The bill says that they can stay opaque if they wish, but failure to disclose would cut them off from the federal tax exemption for muni bonds.

Serious Californians know how much trouble they're in. Last June, the Civil Grand Jury in San Francisco (again, notice this is from san Francisco) issued a report on pensions, "The Billion Dollar Bubble." Its conclusion: "This report is a warning of a deepening crisis in the City's financial condition. . . . We cannot wait."

A report last month from the state's respected Little Hoover Commission said that California has no choice but to take on the court decisions mandating pension costs.

So maybe the state is waking up. Let’s do our part by supporting those officials who see the problem and are willing to do something about it.

Good news (at least for some)

Some good news from last week’s election:

1. Republicans added two new African-Americans to the Congress with Allen West in Florida and Tim Scott in South Carolina.

2. Republicans also gained two new Hispanic stars this election: Sen.-elect Marco Rubio from Florida and the new governor of New Mexico, Susanna Martinez. So, how do Democrats portray Republicans as racist now? I’m sure they’ll come up with something. I think they are very worried about Rubio, who has star appeal.

3. But the biggest news (and the one less commonly known or discussed) is that Republicans clobbered the Democrats in the state gubernatorial and legislative races. Next year, state lawmakers draw new congressional districts, determining the congressional map for the next decade. In the past, Democrats have had a 2-1 advantage in congressional redistricting. Not anymore.

The list of governor races won by Republicans is amazing--Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Alabama, Nebraska, Kansas, Texas, Georgia, South Carolina, New Mexico, Nevada, Wyoming, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Alaska, Maine, Iowa and Florida. They also swept the state legislatures.

Now, it’s true that the tidal wave didn’t sweep through all parts of the nation equally. Democrats won governor's races in California, New York, Massachusetts, Arkansas and Maryland. But what’s interesting about these victories is that all the Democrats' states are losing population—not a good sign for the future of liberalism in the nation.

More bad news from California for the Dems—we’re not only losing congressional seats for the first time since the '50s, but (thanks to the passage of Prop 20) we’re also taking the redistricting out of the hands of the California legislators (hugely Democratic) and turning it over to a Citizens Redistricting Commission.

4. The results will probably mean some Dems currently in Washington will abandon the leftist policies pushed so hard by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, making it easier for Republicans to gain some of their goals. No doubt Claire McCaskill, Jim Webb, Sherrod Brown, and Jon Tester of Montana -- all of whom will be facing the voters in two years -- noticed that popular, long-serving Democrat Russ Feingold just lost an election in a much more liberal state than their own.

All in all, it’s going to be an interesting couple of years. The key question is whether Barack Obama will be like Bill Clinton and modify his position to keep in step with the voters. All indications right now tell me he won’t want to compromise. He’s an elitist, leftist ideologue who thinks we are just too stupid to understand what good things he has done and will continue to do for us, as long as we are willing to turn our lives over to him and a giant national government. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want that. Let's keep the pressure on the Republicans to derail Obama's ambitious plans to remake this nation into another European state.

Meg Whitman as governor?

Sharon and I had a chance to meet and listen to a Republican candidate for governor, Meg Whitman. She indicated her focus would be on three things to improve California’s situation – jobs, education, and economics. I was impressed with her for several reasons.

First, she comes across well in public. She speaks naturally, giving her main points clearly and enthusiastically. She interacts well with the public on a one-to-one basis. She has a sense of humor but combines it with the seriousness of purpose.

In addition, her background gives her credibility on those three issues. Meg is the former CEO of eBay, taking it from a small company to a world powerhouse. I didn’t realize it, but she told us that the eBay is now the home for over one million small businesses. With California losing tons of jobs to nearby states, she may be the one person who has the ability to stop this trend. She stressed again and again the value of small businesses to the health of the state. I also think we need a person with her background to help straighten out our terrible financial situation. We need a CEO to run the state, unlike Arnie’s movie-star approach.

Speaking of movie stars, I was also struck by something she said regarding popularity. She told the audience she does not expect her solutions to be popular because there will be many special interests who will oppose her. But she said she was not worried by that; she seeks results, not love and popularity. I always thought Arnie was too much the movie star, seeking adoration rather than doing the difficult job of leading California out of its messes.

Does she have any liabilities? Meg is not as socially conservative as I would like when it comes to abortion; she is pro-choice. But she indicated she is not in favor of any late-term abortions, she supports parental notification, and she is against partial-birth abortions. I would take her any day when I consider the social positions of her opponents in the Democratic Party. Politics is not about getting everything you want. I get upset at the purists who will only back those with whom they agree completely on all issues. We can still work as private citizens to change the hearts and minds of our neighbors when it comes to social issues.

Some may wonder if Meg would have any power in Sacramento, considering the Assembly and the Senate are in the hands of Democrats. The answer is "yes" because of the governor's power of appointments to dozens of boards. Somewhere between 1000 and 3000 important positions are filled by the governor, allowing him or her to influence our lives without the involvement of the extremely liberal legislature. Meg is fully aware of this and wants to get involved to make sure these posts are given to those who are more in tune with her philosophy, unlike Arnie, who let others make these decisions since he was ignorant of the workings of politics in Sacramento. So it could make a huge difference to have a more conservative person in office even with the radicals running around in Sacramento.

I need to read more about Meg’s opponents, Tom Campbell and Steve Poizner. But I was impressed yesterday with Meg Whitman. May be there is still hope for California.