The campaign to recall Gov. Gray Davis is misguided, largely
selfish and unlikely to succeed. Certainly, as recent polls show,
few Californians think Davis is an especially good governor. But
there is no reason to think a replacement would be any better. And
if Davis’ opponents do have better plans to rescue the state
economy, why aren’t they bringing them forward regardless of
the governor in office?
Initiated mainly by a coalition of conservative groups, the
recall campaign cites the current state budget crisis as the most
serious Davis failure. While Davis shares much of the blame for
failing to head off the economic meltdown, he is not the only
guilty party. The federal government has not stepped in to help in
any significant way, even though California’s economy fuels
billions into the federal budget.
In 2001, the California state budget was $103 billion. But it
could have been larger. According to State Finance Director Steve
Peace, the federal government took $265 billion from the state via
taxes. However, only $189 billion was directly or indirectly
reinvested into the state by the federal government, leaving $76
billion of taxpayers’ money outside of California. While some
of this money goes toward departments that benefit the entire
nation, much of it simply ends up helping other, poorer states.
What practical implications do numbers like these have?
California ranks among the very worst states in terms of
spending per student ““ a fact Davis has done little to
change. Hospitals in Los Angeles and throughout the state face
major cuts ““ cuts they cannot afford to make. And, future
taxpayers are being saddled with the probability of paying for
loans taken out to cover the current budget hole. Imagine how much
could be done if the federal government aided California during
this budget crisis by giving it a portion of the $76 billion it
takes away. Instead, President Bush hopes to implement tax cuts
that will not immediately or directly aid the state government.
Though Davis is not singularly responsible for the $38 billion
deficit California currently faces, he still owns a large part of
the blame. During the boom-times of the “internet
bubble,” California relied heavily on taxes which were buoyed
by amazing, and untenable, growth. Instead of saving money during
this time for an inevitable economic downturn, Davis spent it all.
For example, when student fees faced a surge in the 1990s, the
state covered the entire bill. Even though the university was
growing, the state government did not plan for future budget
difficulties by starting an affordable, gradual student fee
increase plan that would provide insurance funds for the
university. Davis waited. Now, students face a 35 percent fee hike
in one swoop.
Davis is a bad long-term planner, and his protesters are correct
to point out that he has made a lot of mistakes. But there’s
no indication his competition is any better. Darrell Issa, a
leading supporter of the recall effort, offered himself as a
candidate and promised $100,000 to help overthrow Davis. He has not
provided realistic ideas to mend the state’s budget, though.
His interest in the governorship is entirely political, not
altruistic.
Ultimately, the campaign to recall Davis seems poorly grounded.
There is no real evidence that a new leader, thrown into the middle
of a budget crisis, would suddenly improve the fortunes of the
state. Davis should work harder to obtain federal aid and stimulate
the economy, but he should not be kicked out while the state
government is struggling to formulate a working budget.