Gray Davis’s $24 billion deficit is rapidly moving toward $28
billion, says California state Controller Kathleen Connell. But
Davis appears unconcerned. During the state’s budgetary impasse —
which now exceeds two months and will stand as one of the longest
stalemates in California history — Davis has been raising millions
for his campaign and smearing Bill Simon on the airwaves.
In one of his blizzard of attack ads, he actually takes credit
for strengthening the “fifth-largest economy in the world.” Had
Davis gone on vacation to Hawaii for the duration of his first
term, he would have done less damage to California’s economy. Most
businesses stay in California not because of Gray Davis, but in
spite of him.
Davis is avoiding the budget dispute, lest voter discontent
about it rub off on him. Some observers think he wants the dispute
to last beyond the election. But Connell — one of the many
Democrats disillusioned with Davis — is putting pressure on him to
solve it. She is telling reporters that he “absolutely” must
resolve the dispute, otherwise it will damage the state’s credit
rating with Wall Street agencies. “There would be a series of
rippling financial problems if the Legislature does not get a state
budget passed,” she says.
That warning is not likely to impress Davis. Taking out dumb
loans to contain self-inflicted problems is one of his specialties.
But what may get Davis’s attention is that the budgetary deadlock
threatens one of his favorite state expenditures: financing
abortion.
Davis’s friends at Planned Parenthood are worried that the
budget dispute may suspend “medical services” for women. Connell
says that she has no authorization under state law to pay for
Medi-Cal abortions after September 1. A flak for Davis says that
his administration “is examining the situation and looking for ways
to ensure that California women can continue to receive the medical
services that they need.”
Why is a state awash in debt paying for abortions? That question
is never asked. Whether taxpayers should pay for abortion is
apparently no longer even a “debatable” issue in California
politics.
Davis can get away with it, because the socially liberal press
in the state have succeeded in silencing the Republican party on
social issues. Believe it or not, Davis, one of the most crass pols
in California political history, now enjoys higher “ethical”
ratings than his opponent, according to a new poll. This shocked
even liberal Los Angeles Times columnist George Skelton,
who reported that the Public Policy Institute of California found
that voters, by 43% to 28%, believe Davis would “do a better job of
maintaining high ethical standards in government” than Simon. “This
is the same governor, after all, who has set the all-time state
record for raking in special interest money,” writes Skelton.
Davis’s attack ads, which cast Simon as a corporate scoundrel,
are clearly working at some level. But not so well that he can run
away with the race. According to the same polling outfit that
Skelton cites, Simon is only trailing Davis by 11% — not a huge
margin given nonstop negativity toward Simon from the press,
Davis’s estimated ten-times-larger advertising budget than Simon,
and pervasive Republican defeatism.
Davis is still disliked intensely, not just by Republicans, but
by the sorts of liberals he used to work with back in the days he
served as Jerry Brown’s chief of staff. Leon Panetta has said that
Davis should knock off the attack ads and discuss the issues. Peter
Camejo, the Green Party’s candidate who may drain off 5% of the
Davis vote, calls Davis “personally corrupt.” He has told the press
he would rather share a cup of coffee with Simon than Davis.
“Everywhere I go I’m struck by how much Davis has alienated
Democrats and progressives,” he has said.
Perhaps the budgetary mess will revive such anti-Davis
sentiment. It certainly punctures Davis’s claim that he is
“running” one of the largest economies in the world.
Davis frequently asks, If Simon can’t run a business, then how
can he run the fifth-largest economy in the world? Simon ought to
turn the question on Davis in a television ad of his own, saying
something like: Davis has created a $28 billion deficit in four
years. Imagine how large it will be after eight.
