Newsom attacks democracy with ‘kid gloves’ – Orange County Register

FILE – Gov. Gavin Newsom delivers his annual State of the State address on March 8, 2022, in Sacramento, Calif. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File)

SACRAMENTO – Both major American political camps believe that democracy is under attack from the other side, and both are probably largely right. There are simply different styles and approaches to thwarting the supposed will of the people – or at least undermining the complex system that gives people choice in how their country is governed.

Our democracy may be the equivalent of “two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner,” as one aphorism puts it, but it is also “the worst form of government, except for all the others,” as another aphorism puts it. Our system is certainly flawed – sometimes downright ridiculous – but I doubt most Americans would be happy with the results if it were replaced by something more efficient.

As for attacking that system, we have demonstrated one method very clearly. First, refusing to recognize the election. Second, hatching an elaborate legal and political plot to overturn the election results. Third, inciting a ragtag mob to storm a public building. And finally, destroying public confidence in elections for years by spreading conspiracies and attacking opponents in excessive ways.

We call this the “iron fist” approach. It’s destructive, but easy to see and understand: If we win, the people have spoken. If we lose, it’s all rigged. If this sore loser approach ultimately tears down the constitutional order that protects our freedoms and destroys the civil restraints that support that order, then so be it. It’s a short-sighted power struggle driven by the whims of one person.

There is, however, a longer-term institutional approach that is equally destructive to democracy, but is presented in a way that is easier to overlook. We call this the “iron fist in a velvet glove.” In this case, officials give big lectures about democratic ideals but quietly dominate the myriad layers of government to advance their interests and suppress dissent. It’s insidious. Every now and then, though, locals get restless and officials are forced to take off that velvet glove.

We saw the latter recently in California. Our state is dominated by Democrats, who control every constitutional office at the state level and have an overwhelming majority in the legislature. That’s how it goes sometimes in a democracy. However, Californians are not nearly as progressive on statewide ballot initiatives, which infuriates the majority party.

Many citizens are tired not only of the endless tax increases – but also of how few public services they receive in return for the high national tax rates. The media regularly reports on California residents and businesses that continue to leave the state in large numbers and on various scandals in which the government engages in absurd misuse of public funds.

Enough is enough. The California Business Roundtable responded by gathering enough signatures to support an initiative in November that would limit state and local governments’ ability to raise taxes. The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act would have required voter approval for any tax increase passed by the legislature and a two-thirds majority for local tax increases. It would have made it harder for agencies to collect “fees” by forcing them to properly classify them as taxes.

This, of course, would have hit the majority party (and its masters, the public sector unions) where it hurts most: in the wallet. For most conservative-leaning initiatives, the majority has a variety of anti-democratic tools in its toolbox, worn in kid gloves. The legislature could, for example, stuff the ballot with lawmaker-approved, similar-sounding measures designed to confuse voters. The attorney general would write a horribly biased title and summary.

This was too important to be subtle. When Newsom and lawmakers saw the tax cap initiative gaining steam last year, they filed a dubious lawsuit claiming the changes went too far and amounted to a constitutional amendment. The state Supreme Court recently agreed — and withdrew the measure from the ballot, denying the state’s Democratic-leaning voters the opportunity to voice their opinions.