[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics

California's New Deal

by: Robert Cruickshank

Sun Nov 22, 2009 at 17:42:51 PM PST


California never had a New Deal. While California voted for FDR in 1932 (and for each of his three reelection bids), state politics were dominated by right-wing factions in both the Republican and Democratic parties for much of the era. In 1934, when Upton Sinclair won the Democratic nomination on a socialist platform called End Poverty In California, or EPIC, he was unable to overcome a sophisticated campaign machine built by conservative Republican Frank Merriam, which included political ads created by movie studios and shown in cinemas statewide before the election. (A centrist Democrat, Raymond Haight, also ran in the 3-way contest, costing Sinclair anti-conservative votes.)

In 1938 progressive Democrat Culbert Olson finally broke through. An atheist and friend of labor unions, his term in office was marked by battles with conservative Democrats and Republicans in the legislature, frustrating his plans to bring the New Deal to California, beyond the few dams and bridges that had been initiated earlier in the decade. Moderate Republican Earl Warren beat Olson in the 1942 election, and a true New Deal for California would have to wait until 1958, when Pat Brown got elected governor.

As California sinks deeper into a similar economic crisis some 75 years later, we risk making the same mistake - being unable to overcome a legacy of Hooverism and provide the state with the government-led economic recovery program we so desperately need. So argue California scholars Richard Walker and Gray Brechin in a SF Chronicle op-ed today:

Meanwhile, what is California doing? The governor and Legislature are applying the same tactics as Hoover, the state's onetime favorite son. They are balancing the budget by cutting spending. It is a formula for disaster.

The results are the same as they were in Hoover's time: making the Great Recession worse. Cities, counties, schools and universities are laying off workers, cutting expenditures and charging more, thereby raising unemployment and reducing consumer spending....

Now is the time for Californians to remember the lesson of what a great, public-spirited generation did for us. Instead of leaving our children a ruined public sector, we should be crying out for a new New Deal.

One thing Walker and Brechin don't tackle in their op-ed is how California can bring that about, given our difficult budget mess. And yet Walker and Brechin seem to understand that in order to solve that intractable crisis, we have to approach it with the right vision in mind.

Californians WANT a new New Deal. They don't want to see their educational opportunities obliterated. They don't want to suffer in long-term unemployment. They don't want to see their health care options taken away from them (even with federal reform, the state's role will remain important).

They're also willing to pay for it. Tom Elias notes in an op-ed today the same thing I pointed out right after this month's election, that Californians ARE willing to tax themselves for services:

For there are signs aplenty that Californians are willing to work at putting things back on the right track - and even pay to do it.

Perhaps the best evidence for this appears in the results of the early November off-year election, where dozens of cities and school districts placed proposed new taxes before local voters. The vast majority of those proposals passed easily, even some parcel taxes aimed at helping school districts (Long Beach was a notable exception.)...

There are other signs of potential for improvement. One is the fact that even though some businesses have relocated outside California to take advantage of cheap land and special tax breaks, more businesses continue to start up here than in any other state. Far more, in fact, than are leaving.

What California needs, then, is a legislature unwilling to accept Hooverism as the default response to the budget crisis. Instead we need a legislature willing to embrace a New Deal for California, willing to articulate the need for it to the public, and willing to fight to properly fund it with progressive revenue solutions.

The fight, the vision, the leadership is what will enable us to overcome the structural problems this state faces. It's time we stopped using those impediments as an excuse for failing to show Californians the way out of the abyss.

Robert Cruickshank :: California's New Deal
Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

New deal? (0.00 / 0)
Californian's need at least a new deal. We need to redefine the compact between government and the citizens. See my comments on Brian's Desparation thread.  

Changing CA, one open mind at a time.  

California's New Deal (0.00 / 0)
Great post and analysis Robert!  As you point out, we must spend more much more on job creation, infrastructure, and humane welfare programs.  One thing I would add is that progressive legislators can demonstrate that they, unlike conservatives, are fiscally responsible by pushing for progressive income and estate taxes that target the wealthiest Californians as well as a stiff carbon tax.

Gotta love the asterik (0.00 / 0)
Oh there's this ...

"One thing Walker and Brechin don't tackle in their op-ed is how California can bring that about, given our difficult budget mess."

Yeah, that minor detail -- how to pay for it.

Hey, I dont like it either, but there's no evidence Californians favor increase in statewide taxes. The local info you point out is, well, local, where taxpayers believe they can touch and feel the services they get for their tax dollars.

Until Democrats do a better job of connecting the state services with the need for increased revenue and a 2/3 majority, we're going to be stuck in this fiscal mud.


And who could it be that gets paid (0.00 / 0)
to actually have something to do with communications for the Dems and the Dem leadership.  I mean, who do we know that had access to the Dem leadership and control of their outreach for years and years?  

Oh, well, it's not as if the failure to make the case about the connection between state services and revenue could be laid at the feet of someone like that, or even the Dem leadership themselves.  Really, the people responsible are the bumper-sticker caucus and the dirty hippie netroots -- whatever is wrong here, it's clearly their fault.


[ Parent ]
As an afterthought (0.00 / 0)
It occurs to me that someone like that, with years of contacts with state Dem leaders might know someone... a former member of the Dem leadership, like, say, a termed-out Assembly Speaker... and maybe that that former Dem leader  might have a few million dollars that he got in a last-minute contribution from the CDP sitting around in a political slush fund.

And maybe someone with those years of experience and connections, perhaps even with that very former Dem leader, could use their contacts and persuade that former Dem leader to use those millions of dollars as a base for a campaign to get people to recognize that state services require revenue.  Maybe that money could even be used to run independent expenditure campaigns in close districts to try to get to a 2/3 majority.


[ Parent ]
Welcome to the club (0.00 / 0)
Until Democrats do a better job of connecting the state services with the need for increased revenue and a 2/3 majority, we're going to be stuck in this fiscal mud.

We've been saying this for at least two and a half years here. Glad to see our message finally got through.

Now, what all are you planning to do to help Democrats do that better job? As jsw noted, it's not like there aren't resources sitting off the table that could be mobilized to help accomplish that goal.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
californians also really don't want their services cut (0.00 / 0)
and yet people like you are still seemingly unwilling or unable to spend some money and make the case to that electorate that given the choice, it's better to pay some more taxes and keep those services than to cut everything.

i'm beginning to think you all don't want a 2/3 majority, because you would have to do something without a GOP excuse for inaction. because you certainly seem pretty resistant to lifting a goddamned finger to try and do anything to expand those numbers past the 2/3 mark. all this "our hands are tied" BS, but you sit on your hands when you have a shot at actually running challengers to republicans like maldonado or denham.


[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads


Support Calitics:

Get discounted bestsellers at Barnes & Noble.com!

Advertisers


-->
California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary


Powered by: SoapBlox