s
s
Sections
Search
We don't just cover the North Bay. We live here.
Did You Know? In the first 10 days of the North Bay fire, nearly 1.5 million people used their mobile devices to visit our sites.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
Wow! You read a lot!
Reading enhances confidence, empathy, decision-making, and overall life satisfaction. Keep it up! Subscribe.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
Oops, you're out of free articles.
Until next month, you can always look over someone's shoulder at the coffee shop.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
We don't just cover the North Bay. We live here.
Did You Know? In the first 10 days of the North Bay fire, we posted 390 stories about the fire. And they were shared nearly 137,000 times.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
Supporting the community that supports us.
Obviously you value quality local journalism. Thank you.
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
Oops, you're out of free articles.
We miss you already! (Subscriptions start at just 99 cents.)
Already a subscriber?
iPhone
X

The "Follow This Story" feature will notify you when any articles related to this story are posted.

When you follow a story, the next time a related article is published — it could be days, weeks or months — you'll receive an email informing you of the update.

If you no longer want to follow a story, click the "Unfollow" link on that story. There's also an "Unfollow" link in every email notification we send you.

This tool is available only to subscribers; please make sure you're logged in if you want to follow a story.

Login

X

Please note: This feature is available only to subscribers; make sure you're logged in if you want to follow a story.

LoginSubscribe

Barring some calamitous meltdown on his part, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom will become the next governor of California.

Newsom all but locked up the governorship last week when fellow Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa failed to place second in the top-two primary election, allowing Newsom to face a token Republican foe, San Diego businessman John Cox.

On election night, Newsom reiterated the left-of-center agenda he would pursue as governor, to wit:

“Guaranteed health care for all. A ‘Marshall Plan’ for affordable housing. A master plan for aging with dignity. A middle-class workforce strategy. A cradle-to-college promise for the next generation. An all-hands approach to ending child poverty.”

Promising to be “audacious” and “bold,” Newsom declared, “No family should ever lack a roof over their heads. No child should ever be raised below the poverty line. No patient should ever be denied access to basic health care. And no Californian should ever have to choose between the three.”

By happenstance, just two days later, outgoing Gov. Jerry Brown and legislative leaders announced agreement on Brown’s 16th and final state budget, which will take effect on July 1.

The Legislature’s dominant Democrats wanted a budget that would more or less mirror the Newsom agenda and would spend billions more dollars on a wide variety of social services.

Brown, however, stayed true to the fiscal caution he had long espoused, one that limits long-term commitments to expensive new entitlements and socks away more money in reserves to cushion the inevitable economic downturn.

In the final negotiations, he gave a little here and there to grease the squeakiest wheels. He agreed to increase spending on homelessness, for example, but it would be only a third of the $1.5 billion that the state’s mayors had been seeking. And he deflected demands for permanent new spending with some one-time appropriations.

“After detailed discussions, California is on the verge of having another on-time, balanced budget,” Brown said in announcing the agreement. “From a $27 billion deficit in 2011, the state now enjoys a healthy surplus and a solid rainy day fund.”

The stark contrast between Brown’s fiscal approach and Newsom’s campaign promises is obvious.

Even assuming that California avoids a long-overdue economic downturn, where would Newsom get the immense sums of money that he’d need to deliver his agenda?

Just providing “guaranteed health care for all” would cost at least $100 billion more in taxes on someone, according to analyses of a single-payer measure that passed the Senate before stalling in the Assembly. And that assumes that the federal government, which now pays half of Californians’ $400 billion a year tab for health care, would shift that money into a new state program.

The other items on Newsom’s agenda, such as a “cradle-to-college promise,” would cost untold billions more.

Californians already have one of the nation’s highest state and local tax burdens as a percentage of their personal incomes, coughing up more than $300 billion a year. We have the nation’s highest income and sales tax bites and, despite Proposition 13’s limits, hefty property taxes.

We may not be at the breaking point, but paying for Newsom’s promises, especially “guaranteed health care for all,” could increase the burden by 50 percent.

So is he serious, or just blowing election year smoke? And if it’s the former, he should be willing to say who will pay and how much.

Dan Walters is a columnist for CALmatters, a nonprofit journalism venture committed to explaining how California’s state Capitol works and why it matters. For more columns by Dan Walters, go to calmatters.org

You can send a letter to the editor at letters@pressdemocrat.com

Show Comment