California Governor Gavin Newsom appeared “irritated” in a recent interview with The New York Times. But he was not annoyed by the crisis in the education system, where only a quarter of schoolchildren pass basic tests in reading, math, and science, or by the fact that about 35% of Californians live on the brink of poverty. He was angry about something else entirely — that he was being “taken for granted.”
Once upon a time, such an expression would have sounded like a compliment to a politician: if citizens took the work of the authorities for granted, it meant that the state was functioning stably and effectively. But times have changed. Today, many politicians strive to be in the spotlight, actively promoting themselves on social media and demonstrating ideological loyalty, instead of solving the real problems of their constituents.
Newsom is not one to stay behind the scenes. He has set himself the goal of imposing California’s “moral authority” on the country, especially on those states whose policies diverge from his beliefs. “It’s time to go on the offensive,” he said in an interview, implying that he intends to use California’s economic power as a tool of pressure. However, in his pursuit of political battles, Newsom has lost focus on the state’s internal problems, and his decisions are increasingly backfiring.
Political boycotts and their consequences
One striking example is the ban on official trips by state employees to 23 US states where, according to California authorities, discriminatory laws are being passed. The ban nearly prevented the San Diego State Aztecs basketball team from participating in the NCAA finals in Houston — the trip was only saved by the fact that the tournament itself covered the expenses.
Even Democrats in Sacramento have acknowledged that such measures are losing their meaning. State Senate Speaker Tony Atkins said:
“The law was once an important signal against discrimination, but today California needs a new approach if we want to have a real impact on the situation.”
Conflict with Walgreens
Another episode was Newsom’s decision to sever ties with the Walgreens pharmacy chain after the company refused to sell the medical abortion drug mifepristone in 20 states where legal disputes are ongoing. Newsom said:
“California will no longer do business with Walgreens or any company that caves to extremists and puts women’s lives at risk. We’re done.”
However, it turned out that it was impossible to sever ties. Walgreens operates legally in California and is one of the key partners in the Medi-Cal program, through which millions of low-income and disabled people receive medication. In one year, the state paid the pharmacy chain $1.5 billion. Under federal law, Medi-Cal patients have the right to be served at any certified pharmacy.
As a result, the governor’s office was forced to soften its position: Newsom’s spokesman Anthony York said that the governor “will not take measures that harm people in need of medical care,” and Walgreens was again invited to participate in the tender for the supply of medicines.
A trip to the red states and a cold reception
In the spring, Newsom traveled to Alabama, Arkansas, and Mississippi, where he unveiled his new political action committee (PAC) with a $10 million fund to support Democrats in conservative regions. He explained it this way:
“Extremist Republicans are systematically attacking the foundations of our freedom — depriving women of equal rights, attacking communities of color, fetishizing guns, banning books, and restricting free speech.”
However, there was little enthusiasm on the ground. Mississippi Democratic gubernatorial candidate Brandon Pressley refused to meet with Newsom, and Chris Jones of Arkansas, who received funding from his PAC, said:
“Personally, I wouldn’t say what he says.”
From leader to preacher
California once truly served as an example for the entire country. From 1940 to 1975, the state’s population grew from 7 million to 20 million. At that time, the authorities were able to negotiate across party lines and built schools, hospitals, roads, and universities. This spirit of cooperation and creativity inspired other states.
Today, positive leadership has been replaced by moral mentoring and public spats on Twitter.
Questions of morality for Newsom himself
If the governor seeks to impose his understanding of morality on others, the question arises: how moral were his own decisions?
Was it right to keep schools closed longer than almost every other state after the COVID-19 pandemic?
Was it moral to allow the state to default on an $18.5 billion federal loan?
Was it fair to prohibit most residents from working as independent contractors, depriving them of their usual income?
When the governor’s aide tried to justify Newsom’s emotional statements on Twitter, he said:
“Tweets are not policy.”
But that’s exactly the problem. Today, tweets are replacing real decisions, and as always, it is ordinary Californians who suffer, especially the most vulnerable.
