Feinstein’s capability called into question

Establishment still backs her

It has been a rough few months for Sen. Dianne Feinstein. But unless she loses the backing of California’s Democratic establishment, the stalwart of state politics for half a century isn’t going anywhere.

Dissatisfaction with Feinstein among progressives nationally and at home coalesced in the fall over what they saw as her weak handling of the case against Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett as the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which culminated in an endofhearing shoutout and hug for Republican Chair Sen. Lindsey Graham. Last month, Feinstein gave up the leadership job.

Whispers about Feinstein’s mental acuity grew louder last week when a New Yorker article said the 87yearold senator is “seriously struggling” with memory loss. One seeming example took place in public: a Senate hearing where Feinstein asked the same question of Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey twice, word for word. The piece reported other instances that were not public, among them that Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer had to tell Feinstein more than once that she needed to give up the Judiciary Committee leadership post, because she didn’t remember he had already told her.

“A lot of people will trust her to step aside when she thinks it is time.”

Thad Kousser, UC San Diego professor of political science

Quoting unnamed sources, awardwinning journalist Jane Mayer wrote that “her shortterm memory has grown so poor that she often forgets she has been briefed on a topic, accusing her staff of failing to do so just after they have.”

Feinstein has shown no intention of leaving the Senate before her term ends in 2024, when she will be 91. Until then, the only person who can take Feinstein out of office is Feinstein.

“If it changes, I’ll let you know,” Feinstein told CNN on Friday. A spokesman for the senator told The Chronicle that “her comment speaks for itself.”

Thad Kousser, a professor of political science at UC San Diego, said that “this is going to be her internal call. This is someone who has demonstrated such a commitment to her state that a lot of people will trust her to step aside when she thinks it is time.”

California voters had their chance to retire Feinstein when she ran for reelection in 2018. Instead, she defeated state Sen. Kevin de León, a Los Angeles Democrat whose name recognition was in the single digits at the start of the campaign and who could raise only a small fraction of the money pulled in by Feinstein, one of the wealthiest members of Congress.

Mayer wrote that “some who have watched the situation unfold fault Schumer, and the Democratic establishment in California, for not having intervened before Feinstein ran for reelection in 2018.”

That line pricked up a lot of ears in California, particularly among progressives — who, in fact, wanted Feinstein gone in 2018. Some of the same whispers dogging Feinstein now nationally were heard then among the political class in California.

Yet just as is the case now, no top Democrat questioned Feinstein’s faculties on the record for fear of appearing ageist, sexist or disrespectful, or just getting it wrong. Most important: No member of the state’s Democratic establishment turned on her.

Kousser doesn’t expect that to change.

“Nobody has the incentive to ask her to step aside,” he said. “People are still pissed that Kevin de León had the temerity to challenge her in an open election. If it was considered disloyal to run against her in that situation, imagine how disloyal it would be to publicly ask her to do that now.”

In 2018, de León said California was “looking for new leadership” and that it was “time for a new generation.” Others said Feinstein’s style of bipartisan outreach was rooted in a bygone era, and that she needed to speak “loudly and clearly” against President Trump in a new, more partisan time.

The executive board of the California Democratic Party endorsed de León, even after Feinstein drubbed him in the primary that year. The state’s powerful California Labor Federation, with 2.1 million members, backed him as well.

The group’s executive secretarytreasurer, Art Pulaski, said de León was more closely allied with organized labor “on good jobs, climate change, $ 15 minimum wage, protecting immigrant workers and supporting the right to stand together in a union.” In 2012, the labor organization had endorsed Feinstein.

Grassroots activists said de León, now 54, represented the future of the Democratic Party. Raised in near poverty by a single mother in San Diego, he clawed his way up the political ladder to be state Senate president pro tem. He was instrumental in passing climate change legislation and the state’s sanctuary law. He was a Latino candidate in a state where 40% of residents are Latino.

Progressive power was surging in the state party after the 2016 presidential run of Sen. Bernie Sanders, who narrowly lost the California primary to eventual Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Feinstein had lost many progressives when she told a San Francisco audience in 2017 that she hoped Trump “has the ability to learn and to change. And if he does, he can be a good president. And that’s my hope.” When de León challenged her, Feinstein altered her positions on a couple of issues, such as dropping her support for the death penalty. But on a broader level, she didn’t change course.

“I’m not a namecaller. I don’t call people names,” she told The Chronicle’s editorial board. “My job is to get legislation passed or get problems solved or find money to help solve those problems.”

Feinstein’s lowest moment of the campaign came when she addressed the state party convention in February 2018. Music began playing as she exceeded her allotted time on stage. Feinstein kept talking, saying, “I guess my time is up.”

De León supporters, who dominated the convention floor, chanted, “Your time is up! Your time is up!” In a vote, 54% of the convention delegates supported endorsing de León. It was short of the 60% needed for the full party to endorse, but it was embarrassing for Feinstein.

But the Democratic establishment did not abandon Feinstein — the establishment and the state party are two different things. The state’s top leaders, including thenGov. Jerry Brown and thenLt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Kamala Harris, all backed her.

So did nearly every California House Democrat, with Rep. Ro Khanna of Fremont one of the notable exceptions. Democratic state Sen. Toni Atkins of San Diego, who would succeed de León as Senate leader, was one of the few prominent state party leaders to back the challenger.

“Elected officials are riskaverse,” said Amar Shergill, chair of the progressive caucus of the California Democratic Party, who supported de León. “Kevin de León was a great candidate, but there simply was not enough money to break through the establishment’s favored candidate.”

Feinstein locked up the state’s top donors. She raised nearly $ 24 million, including $ 8 million she loaned herself from her estimated net worth of $ 88 million. DeLeon raised less than $ 2 million. Feinstein’s top strategist, Bill Carrick, said at the time that DeLeón “owns his own fundraising problems.”

Yet even San Francisco environmentalist Tom Steyer, a billionaire who worked with de León on climate legislation, chipped in a mere $ 16,200 for his friend to go along with his endorsement.

Some political operatives who were lined up to help de León’s campaign backed out at the last minute as major national Democratic organizations threatened to withhold business if they worked against Feinstein.

Feinstein promised to debate de León — she had not done that with a challenger since 2000 — but ultimately agreed only to a “conversation” moderated by a nonjournalist that was livestreamed at noon on a Wednesday, with no TV coverage.

On election day, Feinstein won with 54% of the vote to de León’s 46%.

Feinstein is likely to survive this latest challenge to her Senate seat as well, as long as the voices raising doubts about her remain anonymous. Her longtime friend Joe Biden — for whom she hosted fundraisers during the justconcluded campaign — is the presidentelect. Harris, her fellow California senator, is the vice presidentelect.

And there is still a deep well of respect for her in the state and beyond. She was the first woman to be mayor of San Francisco, and guided the city after the dual 1978 traumas of the assassinations of Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk, and the mass murdersuicide at Jonestown. In the Senate, she authored the 1994 assault weapons ban that stood for a decade, and oversaw a landmark sixyear investigation into the CIA’s post9/ 11 torture program.

“Sen. Feinstein works as hard today as she ever has and continues to get bills passed even as the Senate’s legislative work has slowed to a crawl,” Feinstein spokesman Tom Mentzer said. “She gets more done for California than anyone, especially now as the state faces so many major challenges. That will remain her focus.”

So unless some prominent members of the California political establishment convince Feinstein that her time is up, she will be the one who determines when it is. Progressives may be influential in state politics, but they don’t run it.

So far, the establishment is silent.