Newsom the obvious choice

Gavin Newsom was diving into the deep end of California politics and policy, running for mayor of San Francisco, when John Cox was still an Illinois resident in pursuit of the pipe dream of becoming its U.S. senator in 2003. Newsom won that election and has been immersed in public service for this state ever since. Cox dropped out of that race, ultimately won by a state senator named Barack Obama, and has been pushing oddball ideas and running against the odds ever since. Trivia buffs might even remember that Cox had a short-lived run for the 2008 presidency that gained him 39 votes in New Hampshire and 83 in South Carolina.

The contrast between these two candidates — in experience, in policy position, in seriousness, in grasp of the state’s issues and culture, in stature — could hardly be greater.

Those of us who have followed Newsom closely since his appointment by Mayor Willie Brown to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1997 have our eyes wide open to his strengths and weaknesses: his audacious visions and his sometimes disappointing followthrough, the charisma of a politician with movie-star looks and hypnotizing rhetoric ... and maddening expressions of pique and hubris, the dual traits of intense substance and ambition that can’t quite decide whether they collide or complement.

But any fair assessment of Newsom, who turns 51 this month, would conclude that he is both steelier and more humble for having gone through that political maturation in a very public way the past two decades.

He is eminently qualified — in knowledge, in temperament, in drive — to govern this state.

It is regrettable that Democrat Newsom, driving the decision with his big lead in the polls, ducked the opportunity to debate Republican Cox in prime time on statewide television. Californians surely would have seen that Newsom was the one who shared their values: on the environment, on acceptance of di-

versity and immigration, on addressing family issues and education, on gender equality, on the need to build a 21st century infrastructure, on the need to challenge the Trump administration’s utter contempt for the institutions of democracy and governmental safeguards for consumers and our natural resources.

Cox’s campaign, as is his history, is all about gimmicks and sound bites. Repealing the gas tax will strip away funding from the projects that actually might help relieve congestion. Handing out water bottles to frustrated Californians in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles is not going to fix an entrenched and technology-backward bureaucracy. Vilifying immigrants in a few selective high-profile crimes and advocating a border wall is not going to address the reality that the overwhelming majority of people who are coming here are for jobs that are essential to our economy. Waffling or deflecting questions on climate change or abortion rights is ceding leadership on issues that truly matter.

Cox, who is endorsed by President Trump, has long had a penchant for symbolic solutions and a disdain for working his way up the system. In 2016, he proposed a ballot measure to require state legislators to wear NASCAR-style patches of their top donors at official functions. When that did not qualify, he came back with an initiative to create a “neighborhood legislature” of more than 10,000 members voting from their homes. That failed, too.

Newsom, by contrast, is grounded in reality. His platform includes a commitment to move toward universal health care, though he readily acknowledges it could take years — and a power shift in Washington — to achieve. One of his focal points would be the “zero to three years,” which science suggests are make-or-break points for a child’s ultimate path. He has pledged to elevate homelessness to a statewide issue, with regional approaches. He is ready to be a national advocate for rational immigration policy in the way that Gov. Jerry Brown has championed climate change.

This one is no contest: Gavin Newsom for governor.

Russell Yip / The Chronicle