☆ Election roundup (12/14): Will State gov't (finally) cut ties with oppressive programs and regulations?
Boondoggle transit projects. Overbearing environmental reqt's. (And that's just the tip of the iceberg.) In this exclusive, Opp Now contributors suggest changes in gov't at the city, county, state, and federal level could mean less Fed funding for HSR and BART's extension—and “aggressive deregulation” on local water/energy. More comments, below, from: Cato Institute's Marc Joffe, CPC's Edward Ring, Midcoast Community Council's Gus Mattammal, and SVTA's Pierluigi Oliverio.
Big things to watch going forward post-election?
Marc Joffe, Cato Institute federalism and state policy analyst: Trump’s victory has potential implications for California High-Speed Rail, the BART Silicon Valley extension, and other multi-billion-dollar rail projects. The Department of Transportation will now be led by Republicans who have a history of opposition to these projects and a strong motivation to cut domestic discretionary spending. Expect the absolute amount of federal transportation grants to be lower under Trump, with a smaller proportion of the money going to California projects.
Edward Ring, California Policy Center water and energy policy director: Californians are going to have to come to terms with the fact that the Federal government is about to aggressively deregulate and invest in ways designed, at last, to increase the state's availability and affordability of water and energy. A growing coalition of Californians including environmental and social justice advocates and moderate Democrats, along with virtually the entire GOP electorate numbering over 7 million voters, have realized that environmentalist overreach is the reason they struggle to manage their households and operate their businesses.
But against this sudden and much-needed help from Washington DC will be the Newsom- and Bonta-led Democratic party machine, which is making the entire basis of its political appeal revolve around demonizing President Trump and reflexively opposing everything his administration attempts, no matter how sensible. How this conflict is navigated will determine the direction of California politics. It is going to be a messy fight.
What's been under-discussed this election?
Gus Mattammal, Midcoast Community councilmember: Education. The reality is, we have a two-tiered education system in this state: lower-income students get a dramatically different quality of education. And it's been that way for a long, long time. It's worth pointing out that eight years of a Democratic supermajority in the state legislature has made absolutely zero difference. But right now, sensible candidates for school board still have a really hard time fighting against the electoral machine that prevents any meaningful change from happening.
Any other observations?
Pierluigi Oliverio, SJ planning commissioner, Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association board member: It sure looks like candidates stick to what the polling says is important to people, rather than having creative analysis and ideas about our current local situation. As a result, the differences revealed during the campaigns are on the margin.
That sameness may disappear after the election, when we will see single issue memos coming out from CM offices focusing on issues that aren't in the city's core competency, but are getting a lot of media attention. And many in the Council will think the city needs to take on duties that in reality are another governmental entity's job.
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Related:
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.