Everybody’s Mad at Davis on Prop. 187

Gray Davis, who may be the most cautious man in American politics, is the ultimate political compromiser. Davis describes himself as an ideological moderate and is ceaseless in his efforts to fashion public policy that is offensive to absolutely no one. But in his attempt to placate both sides of a continuing emotional debate over the fate of Proposition 187, Davis has learned that symbols can not be split in two.

Faced with a decision to either continue California’s lawsuit to implement Proposition 187 or to end it, Davis did neither. Forced to choose between the options of either ignoring the will of California voters who passed the initiative or offending the state’s Latino community that strongly opposed it, Davis did both. By attempting to craft a solution that would protect him from political harm, Davis tried to split the middle. But Davis’ decision to refer the lawsuit to mediation, arguably the domestic policy version of bombing without ground troops, ultimately satisfied no one.

By choosing mediation, Davis is setting up a process in which he will meet with Proposition 187’s most outspoken opponents to decide its fate. With no proponent of the anti-illegal immigration initiative at the negotiating table, Proposition 187 will almost certainly die a quiet death.

Proposition 187’s supporters, who believed they were cracking down against illegal immigration when they voted for it, are understandably angry to see their efforts come to naught. But the loudest cries of outrage come from the initiative’s opponents, who have argued that the importance of Proposition 187 was at least as symbolic as it was substantive.

For these activists and protesters who resisted the measure’s passage and implementation, Davis’ decision reeks of cowardice. They expected him to stand with them publicly, and he slipped out through a legal loophole instead. By refusing to use the power of his office to kill the initiative outright, Davis’ desire to avoid controversy outweighed his commitment to principle and incurred the wrath of his most loyal supporters.

Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, previously a vocal Davis ally, has been scathing in his public criticism of Davis and has threatened to file his own court brief asking that the case be dropped. After several days of verbal potshots between representatives for the two officeholders, Davis struck back Monday by revoking nine Capitol parking places that had been allocated to Bustamante’s office staff.

Bustamante, the state’s highest-ranking Latino officeholder, has been Davis’ most prominent advocate and most visible emissary to California’s Latino communities. Although some political leaders have tried to defend Davis, outspoken opposition from Bustamante, Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa and the powerful League of United Latin American Citizens have exposed a serious division within the Democratic Party over issues related to illegal immigration.

From the beginning, Davis has tried to have the best of both worlds in this debate, highlighting his opposition to Proposition 187 to liberal Democrats and Latinos, but steering clear of the issue in most other settings. In his campaign for governor, Davis regularly attacked Proposition 187 in front of Latino audiences and through Spanish language news media. But he did not spend a single penny to advertise his opposition to the initiative in the English-speaking media, and Davis rarely raised the subject in public in front of broader audiences.

Much has been made over the potential backlash against Republicans who supported Proposition 187. But the initiative passed with almost 60% of the vote, and Davis’ own pollster has stated that it would pass by a similar margin if presented to the voters again today. So Democrats must find a way to keep Latinos inside the tent with moderate and conservative Democrats who voted for 187. The deterioration of the relationship between Davis and Bustamante sends an ominous message to party leaders hoping to hold together this coalition through next year’s presidential campaign.

Davis succeeded in bridging this chasm in last year’s election because his opponent was unwilling to force him to discuss his objections to Proposition 187 with the voters. But strong leadership is about making difficult choices. In pursuing neither course of action on one of the state’s most contentious issues, Davis showed both his friends and foes that political courage is a quality now missing from the office of California’s governor.