Dems' California problem is not going away

Nearly half of users abandon a search without getting the result they wanted. Instead, they’re stuck in a loop of irrelevant results, slow-to-load articles and contradicting advice.
 
heywa is a whole new way of searching. It gives your result as visual & concise stories, meaning you get answers at a glance. 

And if you want to explore your topic further, you can tap through your search journey without having to re-prompt and start again.

Try heywa for free

The California gubernatorial race has huge stakes for the Democratic Party. The candidates don’t quite measure up.  

California Blues
Whatever else one might think, it’s hard not to feel like California's gubernatorial field is smaller than the moment. Literally, in one sense — the candidates are unusually short for politicians. The field also lacks any of the A-list candidates many expected to jump in: former VP Kamala Harris, Sen. Alex Padilla, and state Attorney General Rob Bonta all passed on the race. The only incumbent statewide office holders, Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis and State Treasurer Fiona Ma, dropped out, as did the only incumbent member of Congress, the now disgraced ex-Rep. Eric Swalwell. That’s left a field of unlikely contenders now battling to be the leader of the world’s fifth-largest economy, leading some to draw comparisons to the 1988 Democratic presidential field, which was labeled the “seven dwarfs,” both for the candidates’ physical stature and their non-heavyweight status.

My sense of this was only reinforced when watching Tuesday’s debate, which was one of the candidates’ last high-profile appearances before the June 2nd primary.

A prime example came in the candidates’ discussion of taxation. A great deal of stage time was spent debating approaches to raising new revenue for the state’s coffers, including a controversial one-time wealth tax for billionaires, which has divided Democrats in the state. Much of the conversation, which framed that tax and others as an effort to respond to federal spending cuts under the Trump administration, elided a central fact: California’s annual revenue in recent years has remained high in historical terms, notably higher than most of the 21st century.

Indeed, despite some candidates’ claims to the contrary, the primary driver of California’s fiscal problems in recent years has not been cuts to federal spending but declines in state-collected tax revenue — a product, according to experts, of its over-reliance on income and capital gains taxes, which fluctuate significantly. 

The above charts are the best approximation of publicly availably data, and fully validated numbers for the past two years are not yet available; it’s likely that those will show federal spending cuts under the Trump administration having some of an effect. But the broader picture is clear: California, the centerpiece of Democrats’ electoral coalition and the biggest laboratory of its ideas, faces persistent deficits, a hemorrhaging population, the highest cost of living and the highest housing costs in the country, and its budget problems are almost entirely of its own creation. With weeks to go before primary day, the leading Democrats in the race have avoided articulating a plan to change course.

One more thing here: the candidates’ verdicts on Newsom
I’ve written in here before that California’s gubernatorial election presents a tricky test for Gavin Newsom and his legacy, given how much the candidates, in both parties, are railing against problems in the state (real or perceived).

That subtext was brought to the surface on Tuesday, when each candidate was asked their one-word summation of Newsom’s time in office. The Republicans on stage, predictably, went with “failed” and “failure.” Notably, the leading Democrats largely shied away from any real criticism:

Villaraigosa: “Performative.”
Porter: “Bold.”
Steyer: “Progressive.”
Becerra: “Game-changing.”
Mahan: “Incomplete.”

The two with the most critical descriptions were Villaraigosa, who is polling in the low single digits, and Mahan, a frequent Newsom antagonist who has positioned himself as the race’s pragmatic choice but has struggled to break into the top tier. One real thing at stake for Newsom in the June primary, which will decide which two candidates, regardless of party, head to the general: whether a staunch critic of his record gets a nationwide platform for the next five months.

For now, Democrats’ biggest fear — that the two Republicans would advance to the general, locking the party out completely — appears increasingly unlikely. Polls generally Becerra, Steyer, and Hilton clustered in the top three.

The race to the gerrymandered bottom
For a brief moment a few weeks ago, it looked like the Great Gerrymandering War was approaching an end. Democrats had successfully pushed through their map in Virginia and Florida Republicans were retaliating with a redraw that would likely make the entire ordeal a wash. Two developments over the past week have fundamentally changed that.

First came the Supreme Court’s long-awaited decision in Louisiana v. Callais. Experts initially noted the text of the ruling was notably narrower than many had expected. But the practical effect has been as maximalist as many on the left feared: the Voting Rights Act’s impact over the House map is, for all practical purposes, essentially gone. Then, on Tuesday, came vindication for pro-gerrymandering Republicans in Indiana, where Trump-backed challengers defeated almost all the GOP incumbents who had thwarted his entreaties to gerrymander the state last fall. The races were a huge win for the administration, likely to quell any concern (or hope) that Trump has lost influence in GOP primaries and scare even more Republican state legislators into acquiescence. 

Red southern states like Louisiana, Tennessee, and Alabama are responding to Callais by rushing to cut several Democratic districts (Alabama is doing so after votes had been cast in their upcoming primaries). Plans are now in motion in Democratic states, including Colorado and New York, for redraws ahead of the 2028 cycle.

I’ll have more on this issue in the coming weeks. For now, two worthy reads: Kyle Tharp’s Chaotic Era has an interesting interview with Democratic lawyer Mark Graber, who likens the current moment to “the end of Reconstruction.” And Dave Weigel of Semafor wrote about Republicans’ optimism and the emergence of a fundamentally different electoral system. 

And finally: court packing? Don’t bet on it
Speaking of institutional warfare, two likely 2028 contenders threw cold water on one of activists Democrats’ most long-shot ideas this week.

Asked by liberal influencer Brian Tyler Cohen about expanding the Supreme Court, Newsom seemed to close the door, saying he “gets the instinct” and is “open to the argument” but fears escalation: “My only concern would be there would be [there would be] more members of the Supreme Court in fifty years than there are members of Congress if we continue to do this.” JB Pritzker, receiving the Jonathan Martin treatment this week, had a similar take, saying he wants “to see a little more … before I make a judgment like that,” though he allowed that “If that is what is necessary in order to restore our republic … then that may be what we need to do.” 

The answers, coming were interesting to me for a couple reasons, given that both governors have gone out of their way to throw red meat to the activist class. They also make some sense: The idea of actual Supreme Court expansion is almost absurdly fanciful. The court has never in American history been expanded with the intention of changing its jurisprudence, and Democrats would be lucky to scrape 52 or 53 Senate seats, almost all of whom would need to sign onto the unprecedented move, come 2029.

One thing to know: at the state level, though, court expansion has been much more common — and, ironically, entirely concentrated among Republicans in recent years. In 2016, both Arizona and Georgia expanded their state Supreme Courts, from five to seven and from seven to nine justices, respectively. This February, Utah Republicans enacted a law that did the same. 

Got feedback on today’s newsletter? Email me [email protected]