Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Walters helped Democrats last week by outlining the likely campaign against the Party’s gubernatorial frontrunner, Phil Angelides. Walters used an Angelides report critical of Governor Schwarzenegger to accuse the Treasurer of “intellectual dishonesty” and of remaining silent while Gray Davis rolled up record state budget deficits. Walters revealed Republicans would likely portray Angelides as a “Sacramento politician” who helped cause the budget problems Schwarzenegger was elected to fix. Angelides’ link to the unpopular Davis is yet another reason why San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and other possible candidates need to reexamine entering the Governor’s race.
Longtime columnist Dan Walters is politically conservative, but he helped progressives last week by unveiling the line of attack that will undermine Phil Angelides should he become the Democrat’s candidate against Arnold Schwarzenegger. While Democrats are already anxious over Angelides’ lack of star quality, low name recognition, and physical appearance, Walters highlights a deeper problem: the Treasurer’s link to the fiscal problems that led to Gray Davis’ recall.
The occasion for Walters’ critique was Angelides’ release of a report titled “Stop the Borrowing Binge.” The report highlights Governor Schwarzenegger’s failure to put the state’s fiscal house in order, and notes that the state’s debt is now higher than when Schwarzenegger took office.
Arnold’s broken promise to sharply reduce the state’s budget deficit is why many believe he is politically vulnerable in 2006. But as Walters shows, Phil Angelides is not the best Democratic messenger for a budget-based critique of the Governor.
Angelides’ problem-which no amount of campaign money can erase-is that loyalty to fellow Democrat Gray Davis resulted in the Treasurer remaining silent on the prior Governor’s fiscal mismanagement. As Walters puts it,
Angelides claims he was just as critical of Davis’ deficits, but one
looks in vain for evidence of that on his Web site, which contains
a data bank of past public utterances
Walters notes that Angelides’ did not begin pounding his criticism of the state’s deficit until after Davis’ recall, and that the Treasurer’s own finance proposals would require tax increases of $10 billion per year. So Angelides will be accused of partisanship on the budget deficit, and as supporting increased spending at the expense of the taxpaying middle-class.
Here’s Angelides’ problem.
Conservatives regularly attack Democrats for excessive spending, and raise the specter of “middle class” tax hikes even when such proposed increases are limited to the wealthy. But Angelides’ role as State Treasurer during the Davis Administration, and his specific failure to raise public concern over excessive spending under Davis, makes him particularly vulnerable to such standard Republican attacks.
Moreover, Angelides’ “insider” status in state government will enable Schwarzenegger to repeat his 2003 run as “the outsider” against entrenched Sacramento politicians. Rather than the 2006 race becoming a referendum on Schwarzenegger’s failure to keep his promises, it will become another referendum on how Democrats got the state into its budget mess.
Schwarzenegger wins a race framed about Democratic fiscal problems hands down, regardless of his current low poll numbers.
By the time Arnold spends his $50 million next Fall (on top of the $50 million he is spending this Fall), many California voters will see Angelides not simply as part of the fiscally irresponsible Davis Administration, but as using his Treasurer’s position to foster budget recklessness. This line of attack is totally untrue, but we all know how unimportant the truth is to winning elections.
Walters’ analysis makes it clear that the Democrats should not run a Sacramento politician against Schwarzenegger. It should instead follow the Republican tradition at the Presidential level and run a candidate who can say that he has balanced budgets every year—-a claim that can clearly be made by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom.
One reason that Governors rather than Senators win presidential elections is that they are immune from budget-based attacks. Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush all benefited from their non-responsibility for Washington DC fiscal controversies.
Gavin Newsom’s budget record is immune from Republican attack. Newsom not only cannot be blamed for the state’s fiscal crisis, but he can promote himself –unlike Arnold–as having a proven track record of balancing budgets.
In a Newsom-Schwarzenegger race, the challenger will wear the prized mantle of “outsider.” Newsom will be the candidate who is running to “clean up the mess” in Sacramento, a mess not made by Gray Davis, but by the “pay to play” politics of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The potential of four more years of Governor Schwarzenegger should frighten anyone who cares about social and economic justice. The Governor’s current war against organized labor will only intensify if he is re-elected, and he will continue to prevent the passage of any legislation benefiting tenants, schools, the working poor, immigrants, and the cause of gay marriage.
Given the stakes, it is imperative that the Democrats nominate their strongest possible candidate. This means that potentially strong leaders who never intended to enter the race-such as Mayor Newsom—-have an obligation to seriously assess whether Phil Angelides is that candidate.
Dan Walters has clearly shown he is not. He has also demonstrated that the Democrats must run someone with no ties to the Gray Davis, and who can put Schwarzenegger on the defensive for running as the outsider needed to clean up the mess in Sacramento but then governing according to the politics of the past.
If there is a stronger opponent for the Governor than Gavin Newsom, then that person should come forward. But even given all of the names mentioned in unsubstantiated rumors, San Francisco’s Mayor remains the leader of the pack.
