Why is this man running for Governor of California?
I just heard recently that the former (and infamous) mayor of Los Angeles, His Holiness Antonio Villaraigosa, is running for governor of California. I have to just sigh.
I am baffled that the same notorious people keep running for the political offices throughout the country. Former California senate and presidential candidate Carly Fiorina is contemplating a senate run from Virginia (she lives there now, and ran her crapticious presidential campaign from that state), Rudy Guiliani ran for President twice, along with Mike Huckabee and Senator Rand Paul. Granted, many of them knew they would not win, but ran to increase exposure and to demand higher speaking fees for their red meat crowds (both liberal and conservative). Still, I am saddened that very few people outside of the old retreads (figuratively speaking) in our political class run for multiple positions. There is nothing new with those politicians or their platforms.
Mr. Villaraigosa had grand ambitions as Los Angeles mayor, where many projects fell short of their goals. Part of that I suspect is that the donor class within city limits (like the Vatican's Curia) controls much of what goes on behind the scenes, and may have pushed back when his ambition got the best of him. Still, if you have an ambitious agenda, and you talk a big game, you have to be able to deliver to your constituents.
He had a mixed record as administrator of the nation's 2nd largest city. Antonio was a supporter of public transit in Los Angeles, and that is why Metro was able to receive sales tax increases (Measure R) due to his whipping the vote counts for passage. On the other hand, his role in trying to fix potholes, and repair the city's infrastructure was a moderate success. He wanted to break up the LAUSD, which is a great idea, into 5 or more divisions, to increase accountability. However, he was not able to get people to support him for those proposals (he also ran into school administrators, teacher's unions, and segments of concerned parents). Mr. Villaraigosa did work out a beneficial partnership that did bring in some small levels of accountability, but it was not what he wanted, and the educational goals he had hoped for did not pan out.
The city at the time did not have a large police force to deal with the problems of a young 21st Century metropolis. Mayor Villaraigosa did grow the LAPD to a force numbering over 8,500 officers, although his goal was to increase the police force by 1,500 officers to over 10,000, but that did not happen. In fact, he padded some of those numbers with the city agency that provides protection for the city's buildings and other notable locations. Crime reduction was another positive in his favor, and those gains in terms of increased public safety have remained relatively constant.
Additionally, he did have an impact as an environmentalist, including exceeding the Kyoto Protocol levels of water consumption, conservation and carbon emission reduction in certain areas of the city. Mr. Villaraigosa mentioned once that he wanted to plant 1 million trees in the city, and that goal was not achieved either (he "only" managed to put around 350,000 trees, which is still pretty impressive, though).
Additionally, he wanted to eradicate the city's growing budget deficit, which had reached $530 million around the time he wanted to run for Governor the first time, in 2010. That embarrassment was a dent in his political ambitions, and he has now waited patiently for another chance once Jerry Brown rides off into the sunset (and his Moonbeams). At this current time the budget shortfall is hovering around $150 million, so he did make some progress in lowering it, but part of that credit does go to the current mayor, Eric Garcetti as well. Another problem is that Villaraigosa worked out an agreement to raise city employee salaries by 5% per year, and this was before the economy collapsed in 2009. A 25% increase is too much for most cities to effectively deal with and balance future budgets with this type of expenditure. It will lead to more deficit spending, something Los Angeles does not need in this time period.
His first state of the city address, back in 2006, was given by a more ambitious and telegenic mayor that the old, grizzled vet 8 years later in 2013. While he does get credit for some things, he did not accomplish many other items on his agenda. A Los Angeles Times poll showed that roughly 20% of city residents felt he was a good mayor, and delivered on his proposals. The article's author felt that reflected more on his lack of more accomplishments, than his general failures.
I think he would be a similar type of first term governor. He will make grandiose pledges and promises, deliver on some of them, pad his numbers for others, and make the shallow case that Mr. Villaraigosa does deserve a second term. Personally, I think California needs someone more dynamic, in touch with younger voters (who will make up the workforce) and can deliver on doable, but major campaign promises. The state will have a large increase in expenditures due to absorbing health costs for new immigrants, and the loss of some tax revenue with people leaving the state for greener pastures in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico. In order to revive the state's economic fortunes (I know California has the world's 6th largest economy, but the economy benefits corporations and wealthy residents more) for most residents who are middle and lower income. The state needs a politician who will change the way California runs itself, and Antonio Villaraigosa is a politician cut from a previous generation's cloth. The state needs a new type of 21st-century politician, one that will usher the state into the new century as well, and make California "Great Again!"
Sorry, Antonio, you are just not that person our state needs.
Sources: Los Angeles Daily News (February 4, 2009)
http://www.dailynews.com/article/ZZ/20090224/NEWS/902249875
Los Angeles Times (April 15, 2013)
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/apr/15/opinion/la-oe-newton-column-villaraigosa-20130415
Agree with your analysis and particularly the comment that the same politicians recycle their platforms and pledges to continue what they are sometimes not quite qualified to do. Agree also that younger dynamic leaders who think outside the box (which Californians are known to do more so than in other States) should come forward and challenge the old guards. It will be interesting to see what happens then!
ReplyDelete