Prop. 187 Decision Puts Governor to No-Win Test

The rhetoric has caught up with Gov. Gray Davis, as it inevitably does with most high-profile politicians. He is cornered between two oft-repeated promises that, to many, seem in direct conflict.

Talk’s cheap. Action often brings a stiff price.

Davis must choose between two constituency groups: loyal Latinos and broader-based moderates. He risks angering one while pleasing the other.

The issue is one of the most sensitive and volatile--and politically exploited by both sides--that California has faced in the ‘90s: illegal immigration.

In his toughest decision yet, Davis soon must conclude whether he, as California’s governor, should continue to defend Proposition 187 in the courts.

The basic background: Prop. 187 sought to deny illegal immigrants most taxpayer-funded public services. Voters overwhelmingly approved it in 1994 by 59% to 41%. A federal judge tossed out the key provisions. Gov. Pete Wilson appealed to the U.S. 9th Circuit, assuming the case ultimately would be decided by the Supreme Court.

Wilson was the measure’s most outspoken backer; Davis an opponent. Now the 9th Circuit wants to know whether Davis will proceed with Wilson’s appeal. If he refuses, the case apparently will die and the anti-187 side will win.

“It’s a lose-lose situation for Gray,” acknowledges one of his political strategists.

*

Davis seems to be snared by his own words.

Wooing Latinos, the governor repeatedly has vowed--as he did in his inaugural address--that “the era of wedge-issue politics in California is over. . . . You can finally ring down the curtain on the politics of division.” Many Latinos have heard this not only as a slam at Wilson, but as reaffirmation of Davis’ resistance to Prop. 187.

But the governor also frequently has rejected the notion of countermanding voters. “I have no intention of defying the will of the electorate,” Davis once told me when I asked him about another ballot measure, the anti-affirmative action Prop. 209.

Just last Thursday--commenting on possible attempts to repeal Prop. 10, the tobacco tax initiative--Davis told reporters: “One thing I’ve learned . . . people greatly resist efforts to undermine their will. Even if they didn’t vote for an issue . . . they do not like efforts to repeal that law.”

A few moments later, the governor remarked: “I’m against 187, but I’m going to execute the laws of the state . . . I’ll be bound by whatever the courts ultimately resolve . . . It has to work all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

But Davis also said he has not decided whether to block the case’s route to the Supreme Court by dropping the appeal.

The conflict boiled over this past weekend at the Democratic state convention in Sacramento. Davis’ strongest legislative ally, Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa (D-Los Angeles), called a news conference to pressure the governor into killing the appeal. “I feel very strongly about it,” he declared, firing a shot across Davis’ bow. On Sunday, the convention unanimously urged Davis to scuttle the suit.

Davis, paradoxically, used the convention to re-declare himself a moderate. A party gathering of liberal activists is about the last place you’d expect to hear a Democrat preaching moderation. And his reception was predictably tepid.

“I am a moderate and a pragmatist,” Davis declared, chopping his right hand on the podium and receiving no applause. “On election day, the overwhelming majority of voters rejected the politics of extremism and demonstrated they want to pursue a centrist path to the future.” Again, no reaction.

By contrast, delegates cheered San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown when he asserted--in an indirect slap at Davis--”I don’t care whether you call it moving to the right or moving to the left, you have to move to your base. Work your base.”

*

Davis is concerned about two bases.

Moderates voted for Prop. 187 by 55% to 45%, according to a Times exit poll. If that measure were back on the ballot today, it probably would pass again, says Davis pollster Paul Maslin.

If a governor refused to defend Prop. 187, how could he explain that to the nearly 5.1 million Californians who voted for it? He could say: In good conscience, I just cannot defend this measure. I believe it’s both wrong and unconstitutional.

But a governor is not a judge. If he were to pursue the case, how could he explain that to Latinos? This way: Allowing the courts to decide 187 will help end wedge issue politics by heading off another divisive initiative campaign. Besides, as governor I have a duty to allow the electorate to present its case.

Whatever Davis does, he should do it quickly and not let this boil too long. The heat’s only going to get more searing.