Peak California

something that struck me in that article (0.00 / 0)

was that all of the interview quotes were from white californians, and all but one were either pollsters, political consultants, or poli sci profs. kind of odd given the fact that it's an article on what the electorate feels, an electorate that is majority-minority and growing moreso.

when you think about it, the whole "peaked" narrative assumes whiteness, really. "our" state is slipping out of "our" hands, and thus will never be as good as the good ol' days. golden age = white electorate.

something else interesting about the poll is the crosstab breakdown:

48% of protestants were born-again

70% white
16% latino
5% black
5% asian

22% over 65.

i can't find the current info on age or born-again, but here are the 2006 numbers for california:

43% nonwhite latino
36% latino
12% asian
6% black

it would be interesting to know whether they weighted for this in the poll.

surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

---

by: wu ming @ Sun Nov 08, 2009 at 22:45:39 PM CST

oops, flipped my words (0.00 / 0)

43% should be non-latino white.  

surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

---

by: wu ming @ Sun Nov 08, 2009 at 22:46:30 PM CST

[ Parent ]

the poll's household income is also interesting: (0.00 / 0)

household income...........................................................%

Less than $10,000...........................................................3  
$10,000 to under $20,000...............................................6  
$20,000 to under $30,000...............................................8  
$30,000 to under $50,000..............................................14  
$50,000 to under $75,000..............................................15
$75,000 to under $100,000............................................14
$100,000 or more...........................................................24


surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

---

by: wu ming @ Sun Nov 08, 2009 at 22:57:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Well... (7.00 / 3)

I can't escape my background and the bias it invariably creates.

That being said, I don't think the narrative of a state having peaked is strictly about whiteness.

California since 1950 offered significant and very real benefits, including but not limited to upward mobility and political power, to those who were not white and who were not male, in a way that very few other states did. We must not write that out of the history merely in order to draw attention to the lack of full inclusion or full equality of our state over the last 60 years.

The bitter irony of the California Dream is that it really did offer something to everyone, even as it was structured along racial lines. It never fully included every person of color, or every person of lesser financial means, but neither did it permanently and violently exclude them as in other places. California was better than many other states, but not nearly as good as we should have been.

Of course, in 1978 the white suburban electorate decided to resolve the ambiguity by closing the door on those who were oh-so-close to finally achieving genuine equality and parity. Serrano was decided? OK, we'll cut funding for schools. African American politicians win power in the state's major cities after decades of extremely violent exclusion? OK, we'll cut their funding and draw a white noose (Robert Self's phrase, not mine) around those cities. Tom Bradley is going to be elected governor? OK, we're going to mount an under-the-radar absentee ballot campaign to ensure he's defeated, and that he can't take our guns even if he wins. A liberal black man from San Francisco is going to dominate the state even after Prop 13? OK, we'll pass Prop 140 to force Willie Brown out of office. And so on and so forth.

Yet even after 1978, the California Dream was still viable for a lot of people who weren't white and weren't suburban. The millions of people who moved here from Latin America, or East Asia, or the Middle East, or South Asia, still found some measure of prosperity. Their children were able to attend UC Berkeley, as were the children of California's long-suffering underclass. More and more were being caught in the undertow of the neoliberalizing economy, but even in the '90s there was the sense - and, perhaps, the real chance - that the Dream could live.

What we now know is that the dream is dead. For now. Until someone commits to implementing its revival. It's dead for everyone. Whites are coming to this realization, and yes, for some there will be nostalgia for the era when the California Dream was defined as exclusively white. For others, Langston Hughes is still their muse, California never was California to them.

And yet I think, or maybe I delusionally hope, that for most Californians, they feel that the California Dream really did mean something more progressive than the Texas Dream. The poll skewed whiter and older than the population, but even a clear majority (54-39) said the immigration issue should be resolved by mass granting of citizenship and not by deportation. There really was an element of the California Dream that showed an equal, prosperous post-racial society was possible, and there really are a LOT of people in this state who desperately wanted that to happen, and to happen here.

We've all been kicked in the face, though some of us have lost more teeth than others. This crisis is finally bringing the white suburban class into something resembling the Dickensian scenes that many others outside that class have been living for a while. And this crisis has wiped away their illusions that, as TIME Magazine foolishly argued last month, we can somehow stagger on as before.

That's an opportunity. For every backlash conservative like my own Orange County parents, who see this crisis as reconfirming the need to get rid of "the illegals" and to ensure that their taxes never rise again, there are Californians who see this crisis as proof that we need to get serious about realizing the progressive promises inherent in the Pat Brown California Dream (remember that he was thrown out of office in 1966 because he vigorously allied himself to the Civil Rights Movement) in a way that is consonant with 21st century realities.

I'm not sanguine about the challenges we face, or the fact that there are a lot of Californians who don't understand the need to change or who are so determined to protect their privileges and benefits that they'll let everything collapse around them out of spite.

But this is an opportunity we simply cannot miss.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

---

by: Robert Cruickshank @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 01:38:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]

heh. wasn't intending to poke at your argument (0.00 / 0)

so much as the article's assumptions. i mostly noted that the poll and the article were - like nearly every other article i've read in CA politics - disproportionately white, old and rich, and that that has got to play a significant role in their explanation of "what californians think."

there is an emerging majority in california for a very different sort of state, but the media/pundit/political conventional wisdom conception of who we are as a state doesn't seem to have recognized the huge demographic shifts of the past two decades. or rather, it refuses to accept our existence.

i don;t know how we assert our existence, but it has got to come from below. i suspect that if the poll had been a bit broader in who it polled, that attitudes on immigration, taxes, public spending and the issues of the day would have likely been even more skewed to the left. the trick is that without those everyday voices getting into the public eye, we are tricked into thinking that we're a minority when in fact we are increasingly becoming a majority.

i think the first major politician to champion a new california dream targeted at the state as we are and will be (instead of how we were several decades ago) will shock the establishment with the results. what a pity that, for the time being, noone is stepping up to the plate.  

surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

---

by: wu ming @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 02:39:09 AM CST

[ Parent ]

um (0.00 / 0)

Best. Comment. Ever.

I'm the project director and statewide organizer for California VoterConnect.

---

by: da @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 16:59:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

urf (0.00 / 0)

(that was directed at robert's, apparently there's no comment delete button!)

I'm the project director and statewide organizer for California VoterConnect.

---

by: da @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 17:00:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

(0.00 / 0)

Well for one, the community college to social services pipeline (nursing, social work, connected NGOs) pretty much built the new black (female) California middle class, that's a pretty important aspect of the post-'60s "California Dream"

Of course, the flip side of that is that credential creep, use as a jobs program, and capture as patronage made social services uniquely expensive to administer.

Trade-offs.

Disclosure: I'm awesome.

---

by: Teralloy @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 12:58:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

the electorate v. the population of california (0.00 / 0)

the demographics cited above are a great example of the disconnect between the voters and the residents of california.

yes, the resident population of california is now majority-minority.

but the composition of the electorate (the voters) is still overwhelmingly white (supermajority), older, and more conservative than the residents of the state. for example, 2008 was the first election where the asian share of voters equaled that of blacks in the state, even though there are twice as many asian residents than blacks.

so the demographics of the poll respondents are an accurate reflection of the voters in the state.

dowell myers from usc, estimates it will be near 2030 before the electorate in california is majority-minority.

---

by: Alain Dang @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 20:27:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

good point n/t (0.00 / 0)

surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

---

by: wu ming @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 22:35:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I don't think our best days are behind us (8.00 / 1)

Robert- I don't think you should be so gloomy. California is going through a retrenching of society at the moment. We are seeing the end of the Post-War/Depression era political consensus. Any major shift in the fundamental consensus in society is always painful especially where race is a factor.

The society that Californians built in the Post-War era sparked intense competition from other states over economic resources. A continuing barrage of marketing and incentives drew away huge sectors of industry. These marketing efforts succeeded in labeling California as a high cost state in which to do business. This caused California politicians to  try to reign in public spending to fight that image. In the 70's, Prop 13 and Reaganism were aimed at the middle-class white population to play on their fears about job security and race as represented by welfare and busing. Since that time we have been on a downward spiral of budget cuts and declining public services perpetuated by ill-conceived and irresponsible tax cuts which did nothing to abate the flight of quality jobs.

All that being said, as the members of the Post-war/Depression Era pass on, I think California will begin to find its stride again. What is going to drive our growth is the emergence a new multicultural consensus that will be fueled by small business at first, then increasingly large businesses. The emerging consensus will demand a high quality educational system that is not ghettoized into white and non-white districts. The new consensus will demand that infrastructure address the needs of the population rather than cater to the wants of the wealthy.

I see this change already happening around us. Go to the older areas of cities that have become predominantly Hispanic and Asian and look at explosion of small business. Look at the proliferation of well-designed and marketed Mexican food chains. With the economic power that comes with successful enterprise, political power follows. There are many who will fail to see the wave that is coming and will be washed away by its force. Just look at the retreat of the California Republican Party as an example. For those who choose not to fear, but to ride the wave, the future will be brighter. So cheer up Robert, you are part of the change that most assuredly is coming.  

---

by: surfk9 @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 14:28:35 PM CST

Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! (0.00 / 0)

I want to be part of that change too! I'm going to come home to California as soon as I can! I too have been thinking that California is not past its prime; we are just going through a reshuffling. We may be down, but definitely not out. And I can't wait to leave the not-so-promised-land-better-than-California known as Texas, after my year-long job search here has produced disappointing result after disappointing result.

My ramblings...

---

by: cali_girl_in_texas @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 16:30:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Taxes (0.00 / 0)

Robert -- where are your comments on the overwhelming opposition to the taxes you say Californians will approve, and to the 2/3 rule?

This is why I call you on the carpet sometimes -- those are the right things but they have no political reality in California. And that's why elected leaders confronted with those constraints are forced to do what they do.

---

by: sacguy @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 17:03:08 PM CST

Of course (0.00 / 0)

When there has been 30 years of messaging in support of limitations on taxes and hardly any messaging at all in support of majority rule, it should surprise nobody that we can't consistently poll majorities for majority rule.

And yet tax measures still pass. Even without any statewide politician being willing to make the case for higher taxes, we've seen statewide votes for new taxes during this decade, and 65% of the tax proposals on last week's ballot passed. We've seen other polls showing statewide support for taxes for public services.

The pieces are out there. But it requires politicians to recognize that. Those poll numbers aren't "constraints" - they are a baseline of where we're at before we have begun to fight.

Political leadership involves figuring out how we get to there from here, instead of just writing off the effort because the polls aren't all friendly at the outset.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

---

by: Robert Cruickshank @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 18:06:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What frustrates many of us (0.00 / 0)

is when Dem leaders take the anti-tax pro-2/3 poll numbers as an immutable law of God, rather than a malleable political fact that could possibly be changed by an intelligent and focused campaign.  Time and time again, Dem leaders have missed opportunities to educate and elevate on this topic.

Let's not be unrealistic.  I don't expect statewide candidates to walk into a buzzsaw by endorsing something that cannot be accomplished and which will alienate voters and produce a Republican sweep.  But is that the reality of the 2/3 rules today?  Really?  I don't think so.  If Obama had that attitude toward the immutability of public opinion, he would never have run for president.

Why can't Dem leaders educate voters that the 2/3 rules have produced the current tax situation, in which people making $45,500 pay the same income tax rate as people making more than 20 times as much ($999,000) -- a fact that all but the gooniest right-wingers would agree is unfair -- and that injustices of this kind are crippling the state and destroying our future?

---

by: DavidT @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 18:11:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

shorter sac dem CW: (5.00 / 1)

"we've tried doing nothing, and noone changed their mind. clearly nothing can be done. vote for us!"

surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

---

by: wu ming @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 22:41:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]