- State & Local
- California
The California Democratic Party’s state convention disappointed anyone hoping that the party dominating California politics for the last 15 years would offer concrete alternatives to the policies that have driven the state’s long-standing problems in housing, homelessness, utilities, gasoline, property protection, and private-sector job creation. And this disappointment has become sufficiently deep that two Republican candidates, Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco, are among the top three in polls, with only about three months to go before the June primary, which will determine the two candidates to appear on the November ballot. The two candidates receiving the most primary votes will advance to the November general election, irrespective of party.
Californians choosing between two Republicans for governor in an over-the-top one-party state? If this happens it will be because the Democratic Party has grossly failed to deliver on what Californians have been asking for: affordability and quality in publicly provided goods and services.
While some national political commentators the failure of the Democratic Party to deliver on what voters want, just one number from last week’s California Democratic Convention speaks volumes about the state’s lack of affordability: Ashley Zavala, one of California’s leading political reporters, posted a photo of her lunch receipt for two, from an espresso bar at San Francisco’s Moscone Convention Center. A ham sandwich, a turkey sandwich, a bottle of water, and a soda totaled about $55, without tip, from a fast food vendor with no table service, or the free tap water that would have come with table service.
The convention was not so much a showcase for young politicians with new ideas as a stale resistance rally aimed at Trump, MAGA, and ICE, disguising the chronic lack of a productive policy agenda for California Democrats to promote to voters or to the nation.
The party’s failed states showed up during the convention’s main event, which featured contenders for the open-seat governor’s race. Eight candidates performed a political version of speed dating, in which each had about four minutes to persuade the party that they should govern California.
Katie Porter, who at one time led in polls but fell quickly following a video late last year showing her being abusive to a staffer, brought a whiteboard to the convention with the words “f*** Trump.” She then led those who came to hear her speak in a chant of the same. Her campaign website reads that she is protecting Californians from Trump cuts and tariffs, fighting for union jobs, building more houses, defending clean energy, and preparing for natural disasters. But this comes across as old boilerplate, with no concrete ideas for how any of this would get done. She called upon those among the other candidates without a viable campaign to drop out, but that advice may bear on herself soon, as she left the convention with less than 10 percent of the delegate vote.
Eric Swalwell, who received a leading 24 percent of the delegate vote, notes on his campaign website, “I'm running for Governor because prices are too high and people are scared. California's next governor has two jobs. One, keep the worst president in history out of our homes, out of our streets, and out of our lives.
“The second job of Governor is to bring a new California. It’s great that we can say we are the fourth largest economy in the world. But what does that mean if you work your ass off and don't have a stake in it? Nothing.”
So, the leading candidate coming out of the convention is sharply criticizing his own party—similar to what Republican candidates Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco have been arguing—but without specific plans to reduce the cost of, say, two sandwiches and two beverages for $55.
Candidate Xavier Bacerra states, “I’m running for governor to make sure that California keeps rising—that we’re building our economy while working hard to protect your rights and freedoms in the state we love.” He wants to remove red tape, invest in law enforcement, and reduce prices. But again, no concrete ideas. Bacerra left the convention with about 14 percent of the delegate vote.
Billionaire Tom Steyer, who received about 13 percent of the vote, has the most concrete and innovative idea among the group to reduce housing costs, which is to leverage cost-effective manufactured and modular housing. But he also wants to raise corporate income taxes to increase school funding and “make California a top ten state for education.” If only it just took money to improve K–12 educational outcomes; most California kids are failing at the basics despite a proposed 2026–27 budget of about $27,400 in spending per student. With an average classroom size of around 24 students, this equals over $650,000 per classroom. It is hard to imagine that California cannot provide high-quality instruction at that level of spending. The problems with California’s K–12 education lie elsewhere, particularly with teachers’ unions, but I can’t imagine any of these candidates taking on the unions that overwhelmingly support the party.
This brings us to Tony Thurmond, who has been state school superintendent since 2019, and who doesn’t list his policy ideas on his campaign website. Thurmond narrowly beat another Democrat, Marshall Tuck, for his office in 2018. Tuck, who has a remarkable track record in turning around some of the worst schools in California, received virtually no support from the state’s Democratic Party in his race against Thurmond. Rather, Thurmond was the party’s choice because of his strong ties to labor unions, along with the worry that Tuck would reform the status quo relationship between education unions and Sacramento. Under Thurmond’s tenure, 65–70 percent of California schoolchildren lack proficiency at national standards in math and language arts.
Former LA mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has struck me as among the sincerest of the candidates. His platform provides much more detail on what he sees as wrong with the state and what he would do about it. On his website, he writes, “In 2023, we had a net loss of over 268,000 residents. They left because things in California got too hard—and too expensive.” He also recognizes that the many piecemeal reforms of the California Environmental Quality Act have been ineffective, and that the next governor must make the “hard choices that past leaders have avoided.” It puzzles me why he is not gaining more traction, as he received only 5 percent of delegate votes.
Most of the Democratic candidates feel so interchangeable. Much of what they pitched wasn’t how to change California’s myriad policy problems. Speaker after speaker framed the governorship as a megaphone against the Trump administration—“fight Trump,” “stop ICE,” “protect California from federal wrath”—which may rally the progressives in the party, but that doesn’t translate to governing. Anti-Trump rhetoric is the price of admission in a Democratic convention in 2026; it’s not a plan for getting permits approved faster, reducing energy costs, improving schools, or getting drug abuse and its attendant crime off the streets.
Republicans represent only about 25 percent of California’s registered voters. Every statewide elected office in California is held by a Democrat. The number of Republican-majority districts within California may fall to just four out of 52. And both legislative houses hold comfortable Democratic supermajorities. But despite all this, two Republicans are among the top three in gubernatorial polls. The reason? Because state policies have been failing Californians for years, and the party responsible for that has not yet offered a candidate who can convince voters that they will make the policy changes that California needs.
