Editorial Newsom the most thoughtful pick in governor’s race
When Jerry Brown was elected governor nearly eight years ago, California was teetering under massive budget shortfalls. He deserves great credit for steadying the fiscal ship.
But, while the state’s finances today are nowhere near as dire as they were in 2010, the challenges are far from over, and new ones have piled on. Voters must now decide who can best lead the state when Brown leaves office in January.
All the candidates vying to replace him are flawed, some more than others. Among them, the one who offers the strongest leadership skills and mastery of the issues is clearly Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom. Articulate and direct, he best understands the fiscal realities that lie ahead and the social problems that remain unaddressed.
The state’s debts. Energy and climate change. Homelessness. Housing affordability. Education. Immigration. Increasing wealth and income disparities. Newsom rattles off issues that concern most Californians and then discusses them with nuance not heard from any of the other six leading candidates.
He doesn’t pretend to have all the answers. And some might object to solutions he proposes, as we do in some cases. But his reasoning is consistently sound and sophisticated, for, unlike some of his opponents, he has mastered the details.
That will be critical for the next governor, who must confront problems at home in California while battling a continuing onslaught from the Trump administration.
Newsom is deferential to the governor he hopes to succeed, calling Brown, perhaps somewhat hyperbolically, “a political mastermind, the likes of which we’ll never see again.”
Newsom, the former mayor of San Francisco, is no shrinking violet himself. As he showed with his early support for gay marriage, he doesn’t shy from battle.
“If you want timidity, absolutely, unequivocally, I’m not your guy,” he said. “I want to be bold. I think this moment demands it.” He’s right. The state needs strong leadership. And bold is good if it’s well-informed.
That’s where his competitors fell short.
State Treasurer John Chiang and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa each profess to be Democratic voices of political moderation and fiscal responsibility.
Chiang knows the numbers but lacks clear plans for attacking key issues. And he couldn’t explain why last year he joined striking Oakland workers on the picket line without first educating himself about the issues or checking with the city’s mayor. It was political pandering at its worst.
Villaraigosa has experience tackling tough challenges in America’s second-largest city and in Sacramento as Assembly speaker. But he doesn’t exhibit Newsom’s command of the details on what needs to be done next for California and could not explain his political meddling as mayor to block necessary changes to the city retirement system.
Former state schools Superintendent Delaine Eastin is such a staunch supporter of rent control that she glosses over the profoundly negative effect it has on housing supply.
Former Hillary Clinton political aide Amanda Renteria, who has never held elective office, is smart and articulate. But aiming for the state’s top job is overly ambitious, as her lack of knowledge about critical issues confirmed.
On the Republican side, wealthy businessman John Cox wants to phase out the income tax system — a plan with great populist appeal that ignores fiscal reality and the regressivity of the alternatives. He also says our gun laws are not helpful and would abandon California’s role as a leader in fighting climate change.
Assemblyman Travis Allen, whose voting record earned him a 100 percent rating from the NRA, is a self-absorbed, hard-core partisan conservative.
It’s against that backdrop that Newsom easily stands out.
We disagree with his support of high-speed rail, but appreciate that he acknowledges the serious financial misrepresentations made by backers.
We disagree with his failure to support Brown’s Supreme Court fight to correct the state’s ridiculous pension vesting rules, but respect that Newsom understands the overarching retirement-funding problem and has thought carefully about other ways to address it.
He wisely opposes attempts to allow wide-ranging rent control and recognizes the “chilling effect” it would have on construction. He opposes the governor’s push for twin waterconveyance tunnels and puts the environmental health of the fragile Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta first in any consideration of a single-tunnel option.
He recognizes that health care will be a top issue for the next governor and supports the idea of a single-payer system but, thoughtfully, is unwilling to let the state venture out on its own without proof that the economics would work.
We’re mindful of what happened when voters last promoted a lieutenant governor with a strong resume to the state’s top job.
Gray Davis was touted in 1999 by a writer for this news organization as “perhaps the best-trained governor-in-waiting California has ever produced.” But he gave away the store to public employee unions, teeing up the pension crisis we face today, before voters recalled him in 2003.
We expect better of Newsom. We expect him to be able to say “no” to public employee unions and other special interests when necessary. To a large extent, that has been at the root of Brown’s success.
On each issue, Newsom appreciates the political and policy complexities. His positions are rooted in a mix of progressive morality and fiscal reality.
It’s the approach Brown has championed during his tenure and one we hope the next governor will carry on.
Election 2018