California Left Twisting in the Political Wind

The War Between the States is heating up again. But this time, it’s not North versus South. It’s California versus Texas. The nation’s third and second largest states are at odds over energy, over the Bush presidency--in fact, over just about everything these days.

California consumers are hopping mad. Who’s to blame for their state’s energy crisis? The energy companies, that’s who. They’re price-gouging California utilities and driving them into bankruptcy. Or so say many Californians--including Gov. Gray Davis.

Will the federal government take action? Don’t hold your breath. President George W. Bush’s energy plan, announced Thursday, may be too late to ease California’s energy crisis. He failed to “answer the 911 call,” said S. Davis Freeman, Davis’ energy advisor.

Furthermore, many of the energy companies that Davis wants to punish--if not seize--are Texas energy companies, and guess who’s in charge of the federal government? Two former Texas energy executives.

The White House response to California: It’s your own damn fault. As Vice President Dick Cheney put it in a recent television interview, “What’s happened in California, I would argue, is they’ve taken the route of saying, ‘Well, we can conserve our way out of the problem .... We don’t have to produce any more power.’ So they haven’t built any electric power plants in the last 10 years in California, and today they’ve got rolling blackouts.”

Davis’ response? “Vice President Cheney is grossly misinformed about California’s aggressive program to build new power plants.” Davis contends that the federal government “has utterly failed to discharge its responsibility” in the current crisis.

California wants the feds to impose caps on wholesale energy prices. The justification? Wholesale power prices have shot up 1,000% in the past year, while California’s demand for energy grew by only 4%. Is that price gouging? It sure looks suspicious. The profits of many Texas energy companies have risen by 500% or more.

Even Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein got dissed by the feds. She had trouble getting a meeting with President George W. Bush to discuss the crisis. She ended up meeting with Cheney last month. Feinstein said afterwards, “It was very disappointing .... There seems to be no interest in really wanting to understand the California situation.” Cheney told Times columnist George Skelton, “The energy crunch is obviously a significant problem. But it, too, will pass.” Easy for him to say.

Bush appears to have no great love for California. He’s traveled to 26 states since taking office. He’ll finally visit California Memorial Day week. And why should Bush care about California? Look what California did to him.

In 1996, California gave former President Bill Clinton a 13-point margin over former Sen. Bob Dole. In 2000, the Al Gore campaign spent exactly zero dollars in California. The Bush campaign spent nearly $11 million. And what did it get Bush? A 12-point defeat.

During the Richard M. Nixon and Ronald Reagan eras, California and Texas were the buckle and clasp of the GOP’s Sunbelt coalition. California voted Republican in every presidential election from 1968 through 1988. That was more Republican than Texas, which was loyal to Lyndon B. Johnson’s vice president in 1968 and to Jimmy Carter, a son of the South, in 1976.

In the 1990s, however, the Sunbelt became unbuckled. California and Texas went in opposite directions, politically. California voted for Clinton--twice. Then for Gore. Democrats, three for three. Texas voted for George Bush, then Dole, then George W. Bush. Democrats, zero for three.

California has two Democratic senators and a Democratic governor. In fact, Democrats hold every statewide elected office in California but one. Texas has two Republican senators and a Republican governor. Republicans hold every statewide elected office in Texas. Every one.

Between 1992 and 2000, California’s delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives went from Democratic (26-19) to more Democratic (31-20). The Texas delegation went from strongly Democratic (19-7) to slightly Democratic (17-13).

California’s state Legislature is nearly 2-1 Democratic (75-43). In the Texas legislature, the two parties are almost evenly matched (93 Democrats, 88 Republicans).

California has become the keystone state of the New Democratic Party, while Texas is now the Republicans’ homeland. The president, the vice president, House Majority Leader Dick Armey and House Majority Whip Tom DeLay are all from Texas.

What’s driving the two great Sunbelt states apart?

Not demographics. California and Texas have about the same percentage of minority voters. It’s white voters in the two states who are really different. And not in their economic attitudes. California and Texas are both heavily suburban states where fiscal conservatism is the rule. The tax revolt started in California with Proposition 13 back in 1978.

The big difference is values. Polls show Texans are more religious and more culturally conservative. Californians are more free-thinking and more liberal on social issues like abortion. California is New Age; Texas is the old-time religion. California is granola; Texas is guns. California enshrines environmental values; Texas enshrines business values.

Those differences have existed for a long time. Nevertheless, the two states were once together, politically, under Reagan. What suddenly drove them apart in the 1990s? The answer is Clinton. Clinton was the first president to come out of the culture of the 1960s--”sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll.”

Californians saw Clinton as one of them, and he made sure they saw a lot of him. Texans saw Clinton as one of “them,” too--meaning, “not one of us.” By election day 2000, Clinton’s job rating was almost 20 points higher in California than in Texas, even though both states were prospering.

Clinton’s gone. Now it’s Bush who’s driving the two states apart. Bush’s values--pro-gun, weak on the environment and antiabortion--are a tough sell in California. But weren’t they Reagan’s values, too? Californians did embrace Reagan, but that was in spite of, not because of, his conservative social values. Reagan had a relaxed, libertarian streak that Californians found reassuring.

Bush is not a Californian. He’s not a libertarian. And his identification with the energy industry makes it that much harder for him in California.

Ironically, it was California Republicans who first petitioned Bush to run for president in 1999. They thought Bush’s appeal to Latino voters would save the GOP in California after the party’s devastating 1998 setback. It didn’t happen, any more than Clinton-the-Southerner was able to save the Democratic Party in Texas. In the end, Clinton was culturally alien to Texas. And Bush is just as culturally alien to California.