On Sunday afternoon, when no one was watching, there was a debate between Gov. Gavin Newsom and state Sen. Brian Dahle. It will be the only debate between the two candidates for governor of the largest state in the nation and one of the most powerful states in the world. It’s what you get with one-party rule and a political culture that doesn’t value the exchange of ideas.
There are big things at stake in California, both because of its size but also its myriad problems. Yet virtually everyone knows the near-certain outcome of statewide contests.
With nearly half of registered voters being Democrats, most of whom will vote along partisan lines no matter what just as most registered Republicans do, and most independents leaning Democratic, it’s incredibly difficult for a non-Democrat to prevail.
In this context, it is perfectly understandable why Newsom wants only one debate and why other Democratic candidates for statewide offices are likewise dismissive of calls for debates. For all of their talk about the importance of democracy, which demands robust civic debate, it turns out they just want the power. That’s it.
Consider, for example, the case of Malia Cohen, the Democratic candidate for state controller. The controller position could and should serve as an important watchdog for state government. Incumbent Betty Yee, a Democrat, has unfortunately been a failure, stonewalling efforts to release line-by-line expenditures of state spending.
Cohen, as a Democrat is the likely successor to Yee, but all she wants to talk about is abortion, about which the state controller has no meaningful role to play. It’s akin to having a city clerk candidate running on a platform of NATO expansion.
It’s gibberish.
It would be one thing if Cohen was running for a relevant office, like legislator, in a state with hard restrictions on abortion, like Texas. But she’s not. She’s running for controller in a state where abortion is legal and constitutionally protected through both through statute and California Supreme Court rulings older than Roe v. Wade.
Her opponent, Lanhee Chen, has attracted broad bipartisan support because he’s actually focused on the responsibilities of the controller’s office. Chen is clear about the powers of the office and the ability to truly hold government accountable through audits and transparency.
Chen has repeatedly called for a debate with Cohen, which Cohen has repeatedly ignored or dismissed. Cohen is evidently bothered by the fact of reports this month that just last year, the license for her consulting firm was suspended due to “failure to file” and “failure to pay” taxes.
“I cannot explain what happened there because I don’t recall,” she told the Los Angeles Times.
A victory for Malia Cohen would be a testament to self-destructive partisanship. A victory for Chen would be a sign that Californians can and want to overcome partisanship.
Alas, Cohen is doing her part to minimize public exposure of the contrasts between herself and her opponent by avoiding a debate. We hope her effort fails.
—The Editorial Board, Southern California News Group
