By Jon Coupal – November 25, 2024
There appears to be no limit to the hubris of Gov. Gavin Newsom. While the state continues to suffer from failed progressive policies that hemorrhage productive citizens and businesses leaving California, Newsom is laser-focused on being the most prominent figure of the Trump resistance.
Just two days after Donald Trump’s victory for the nation’s highest office, Gov. Newsom called newly elected state lawmakers into a special session, ostensibly for the purpose of safeguarding “California values.”
But exactly what are the values he seeks to protect? First, he claims that Trump will continue “the assault on reproductive freedom” by, among other things, “pursuing a national abortion ban.” Baloney. President Trump has made it clear that, consistent with the Dobbs decision and principle of federalism, the issue has been left to the states. California’s most liberal laws on that issue aren’t going to change.
Newsom also feigns concern over the threat Trump poses to “clean vehicle policies that are critical to combating climate change.” But are California’s draconian regulations on global warming (even if wholly ineffective) really “California values?” Legislators from both sides of the aisle have been highly critical of the new rules that drive gas prices even higher.
Upon hearing of the governor’s call for a special session, Assembly Republican Leader James Gallagher hit the nail on the head saying, “If Newsom is so eager to set up a 2028 presidential run, he’d be much better served by fixing the crime, homelessness and high costs that will doom his campaign.”
How true.
In fact, the results from several California ballot measures indicate that the “values” embraced by Gov. Newsom are not so held by most Californians.
Tops on that list is the overwhelming passage of Proposition 36 seeking to restore sanity to the state’s criminal justice system by repealing some of the worst “soft on crime” provisions of Proposition 47, an initiative approved by voters in 2014. When polling last September indicated that Prop. 36 had an insurmountable lead, Newsom was quoted as saying, “I was wondering what state I was living in.” Well, governor, maybe it’s a state that’s not so progressive as you think it is.
Proposition 6 would have banned forced labor in state prisons, but this too was rejected by voters on both fiscal and philosophical grounds.
Progressive disconnect with real California values goes beyond soft-on-crime issues. On property rights, voters thoroughly trashed Proposition 33, which would have allowed local governments to pursue aggressive rent control laws exacerbating the state’s housing crisis. Voters rightfully concluded that more rent control would disincentivize new home construction.
For taxpayers, Prop. 5 was the biggest threat because it sought to lower the two-thirds vote threshold for local bonds to 55%. The two-thirds vote requirement for local general obligation bonds was adopted in 1879 as a protection against excessive debt at the local level repaid by property owners.
After a hard-fought grassroots campaign, Proposition 5 died by a substantial margin, dashing the hopes of progressive tax-and-spend interests. And while it appears that Newsom didn’t take an official support position for Prop. 5, it is obvious that he perceives taxpayers as worthless rubes. For all his posing as a defender of “democracy,” remember that he led the effort to convince the California Supreme Court to remove the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act, a qualified initiative, from the November ballot. The court was persuaded by the governor and the state’s legislative leaders to deprive California voters of the right to vote on an initiative put on the ballot by the signatures of over 1.4 million voters.
Finally, and true to form, how does Gov. Newsom’s proclamation calling for a special session conclude? How else, but a call for more taxpayer dollars to defend California’s unhinged policies.
Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
