Get rid of the Hollywood one-liners and the meaningless
proclamations ““Â it’s time for every candidate
vying to be governor of California to explain how he or she would
run the largest state in the country.
Ever since the recall qualified for a vote ““Â and
particularly since Arnold Schwarzenegger announced his candidacy
““Â the focus has mostly been on the election’s
circus-like atmosphere.
Yet candidates, serious and not serious, have failed to answer
important questions about social and political issues. In
particular, they have failed, for the most part, to address the
issue most responsible for the recall’s existence: the budget
crisis.
Schwarzenegger’s silence is the most obvious. Voters know
Schwarzenegger wants the state to be business-friendly and wants
every Californian to have a great job. They know nothing about how
he plans to fill a $38 billion hole, bring businesses back, or
boost employment opportunities.
The media has done well to call Schwarzenegger on what, so far,
is a refusal to answer serious budget questions. But they’ve
failed to expose Davis and other candidates’ more subtle
elusiveness.
Hoping to divert attention from the recall, the massively
unpopular Davis has trumpeted his support for legislation banning
harmful chemicals, supporting racial tolerance and expanding
women’s health care. He announced a new round of anti-tobacco
ads and increased funding for Homeland Security. But through all
this, he’s failed to address the most important issue: the
budget.
One might expect Davis would feel compelled to address that
issue, especially since he signed a budget that saddles next year
with about an $8 billion hole. Many Californians, fairly or not,
blame him for the dire fiscal outlook ““ but the state’s
top official can’t seem to respond to their concerns.
Second-in-command Cruz Bustamante, hoping to replace Davis if
the governor is recalled, offers a more specific plan, details of
which he said will come out this week. He has said he intends to
close the gap by raising taxes (primarily on alcohol and tobacco)
and making undetermined cuts, but he does not fully support what
was probably Davis’ most substantial effort to fix the
budget: an increased car tax. He claims to champion public
education in California but has not yet demonstrated a plan to keep
it adequately funded.
Long-shot candidates currently offer the most concrete stances.
State Sen. Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks), for example, makes
clear his intentions to reduce the size of government. If
he’s elected, voters can expect little or no tax increases
and massive state spending reductions. Green party candidate Peter
Camejo, meanwhile, said he would push for a tax increase on the
richest third of the population.
Both McClintock and Camejo offered options unpopular with
millions of Californians, but at least they suggest a remedy that
voters can either endorse or not.
Critics of how politicians have handled today’s budget and
economic problems ““Â on both the state and national level
““Â are right when they say the failures of leaders today
will be passed on to the next generation. People in their teens and
20s will inherit a broken pubic education system and massive debts
if problems aren’t dealt with now.
It is crucial for students voting on Oct. 7 to demand that the
person they choose articulates exactly how he or she would operate
a state in crisis. If voters choose to dump Davis, their chosen
replacement must demonstrate the potential for serious
leadership.