California’s politicians must start thinking long term
California’s public policy issues tend to stretch across multiple years or even decades, while the attention spans of politicians are abbreviated by election cycles and term limits. The shortterm mentality of governors and legislators undermines the continuity that’s needed to deal with long-term issues.
Many examples of the syndrome exist but a classic is a project that has been kicking around in one form or another, with multiple name changes, for at least six decades — moving water from the Sacramento River around, through or under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to the head of the California Aqueduct.
It was touted as the last major link in the state’s water system, and originally it was to be a 43-mile-long “peripheral canal” around the Delta when first proposed in the 1960s.
Fifteen years later, and after much angst, then-Gov. Jerry Brown — whose father had launched the state water plan — persuaded the Legislature to authorize it, but voters rejected it in 1982. Subsequently, two governors tried — and failed — to resurrect it as a “through-Delta” facility. In 2009, during Arnold Schwarzenegger’s governorship, it was revived as twin tunnels.
Brown dubbed the tunnels as California WaterFix during his second governorship, but they were still pending when Gavin Newsom succeeded Brown in 2019. Newsom scaled it down to a single tunnel and renamed it again as the Delta Conveyance Project.
By whatever name, the project still lacks regulatory approvals at the state and federal level, and financing and will likely remain incomplete when Newsom’s governorship ends three years hence.
Those outside the Capitol who deal with long-term issues constant lament their inability to persuade politicians to look — and act — beyond their abbreviated attention spans. However, a new report from the Legislative Analyst’s Office — the Legislature’s advisor on budget issues — could finally expand the political focus beyond the next election.
The head of the office,
Gabe Petek, and his staff decided to catalog the major issues facing California as it moves more further into the 21st century, and suggest ways in which they could be addressed. The report collects dozens of specific issues into three broad categories: the state’s economy, Californians’ health and safety, and governance, including revenue and spending.
Each issue is defined, its trade-offs are detailed and its interaction with other issues is demonstrated.
There are no surprises. The document recognizes complex issues that most engaged Californians would mention if asked, such as having a globally important economy along with the nation’s highest rates of poverty and homelessness.
They are also issues that outside groups have repeatedly attempted to raise and persuade the Capitol to respond, often to no avail.
“The list of issues was developed over time with input and feedback from across the office,” the report explains.
“As our work progressed, these topics were further defined, organized, and shared with members of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee — the committee that oversees our office — in an effort to seek additional feedback.
“Throughout this process, we thought about the key factors affecting the current and future well-being of Californians with an eye towards possible legislative actions. Importantly, although this list reflects our office’s attempt to identify the most important issues, it is not meant to be an exhaustive list of issues facing the state, nor does it necessarily reflect the priorities of the Legislature as a whole.”
It’s a noble effort and one might hope that having an arm of the Legislature formalize the state’s major public policy issues — those that will determine California’s future — would spur officeholders to at least begin acting on them. But overcoming their innate preoccupation with culture conflicts, buzzwords and temporary fixes will be difficult.