California’s a One-Party State, But Can Democrats Rest Easy?

If Democrats can’t make it in California, they can’t make it anywhere.

California is closer to being a one-party state than it has been since 1946, when Republican Gov. Earl Warren won reelection with 92% of the vote (having captured both major-party nominations through cross-filing in the primaries).

Today, Democrats are in control. Two years ago, Gov. Gray Davis whupped Dan Lungren, the GOP standard-bearer, by a 20-point margin. Democrats now hold all but one of the state’s seven top constitutional offices, both U.S. Senate seats, majorities in both houses in Sacramento and on the state’s congressional delegation.

California’s surging economy and its shifting demographics have played a role in the Democrats’ current domination. The Republican Party’s tough anti-immigration stance, its harsh, exclusionary rhetoric and conservative stands on such issues as abortion rights and gun control have also helped Democrats appeal to both minority voters and the moderate middle. The numbers suggest that California ought to be Al Gore country.

One key demographic force driving state politics is the dramatic growth of the Latino population over the past few decades. In 1970, when conservative Republican Ronald Reagan won his second term as governor, nearly 80% of the state’s population was Anglo; about 12% was Latino. By 1998, Latinos accounted for nearly 30%, with Anglos at 52%.

Today, one of every three Latinos in the U.S. calls California home. According to projections, Latinos will be California’s single largest ethnic group by 2025; by mid-century, they will likely comprise half the state’s population. This stunning growth has political implications.

A survey by California’s Field Institute showed that Latinos who registered since 1994, when anti-immigrant Proposition 187 passed, have a very different profile than their predecessors. More of them are foreign-born, younger and have less education and income than Latinos registered before 1994. These newer Latino voters tend to be more reflective not only of the larger, nonvoting Latino population, but also of the state’s general electorate, which tends to look Democratic. They have significantly broadened the state’s voter pool--and that’s exactly what threatens Republican candidates in competitive general elections.

Democrats outnumber Republicans among California’s Latino voters by nearly 3-1. According to VNS exit polls, in this year’s open presidential primary, non-Latino voters split their votes between Vice President Al Gore and George W. Bush (30% to 29%); Gore’s 41-point advantage over Bush among Latinos accounted for virtually all his six-point margin of victory over the Texas governor.

There is some evidence that Bush is making inroads into the normally Democratic Latino constituency. A recent survey by the Public Policy Institute of California shows Gore leading Bush among Latino voters by nearly 2-1, 55% to 29%. Compare that with President George Bush’s 19% of the Latino vote in 1992, Bob Dole’s 13% in 1996 and Lungren’s 17% in the 1998 gubernatorial election. But despite George W.’s drive to attract Latinos to the GOP fold in California, the trend in Latino registration appears to be working against him.

Latinos, who are still angry at the GOP stances on immigration and affirmative action, were the only California voter group whose percentage in the electorate rose in both 1996 and 1998. They now account for 16% of the state’s registered voters, up from 10% in 1990. That translates into a net increase of about 1 million Latino voters over the last decade, out of a total increase of 1.1 million new voters.

According to the Field Institute study, “two factors--Latino voters’ greater preference for Democratic candidates and their larger share of the overall electorate--have combined in recent election cycles to produce a structural advantage for Democratic candidates in top-of-ticket contests.”

At the same time California is becoming more demographically diverse, its ethnic constituencies are becoming more geographically dispersed. That, too, has political implications. Even Orange County isn’t Orange County anymore. In 1970, it was a bastion of Republican conservatives living the suburban life; its population was 89% Anglo. By 1998, that percentage dropped to 57%. The percentage of Anglos living in Los Angeles County has declined from 70% in 1970 to 34% in 1998.

Proportionately, more blacks live in California’s traditionally Democratic cities than any other group. But the percentage of African Americans living in urban centers is declining because many are deserting L.A. for better schools and affordable housing elsewhere. The percentage of Latino urban dwellers is increasing.

According to a 1999 Field Institute study, L.A. County and the San Francisco Bay area are the most heavily Democratic regions. Registered Republicans hold sway in the San Diego/Orange area and the Central Coast. Registration is evenly split in the Central Valley, Inland Empire and North Coast Sierra regions.

The valley and inland regions, including San Bernardino, Riverside and Imperial counties, comprise “Inland California,” a high-growth area that Democratic pollster Paul Maslin has defined as “every county not bordering the Pacific Ocean or the San Francisco Bay.” Increasingly Latino, Inland California is home to socially conservative and antigovernment swing voters, soccer moms and younger families looking for safety, decent schools and affordable housing. These counties enjoy growing political clout, as the populations of Democratic powerhouses like Los Angeles and the Bay Area stagnate or decline. Inland California, like inland America, is a prime political battleground this year.

Polls indicate that, as the Democratic National Convention convenes in Los Angeles, the presidential race in California remains competitive. The PPIC survey puts Bush at 37% among likely California voters, Gore at 40%.

Still, are California’s 54 electoral votes really up for grabs this year? Probably not. But how the campaigns play out in this state will say a lot about the future of both parties--in California and nationally. *