California is the site of a series of interlocking problems: It\u2019s just too expensive for many people. There aren\u2019t enough homes, or at least enough affordable ones. The insurance market is a challenge. Homelessness is difficult. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is splitting up families. Federal cuts to universities and health care are rampant. Gasoline and electricity are expensive. Water rights are complicated. Fires and floods and the effects of climate change are already savage. The state is also home to the biggest economic story of our age, artificial intelligence, and remains one of the most beautiful places in the country, where millions want to live.<\/p>\n
Whom should voters choose to deal with all of this? The California governor\u2019s race has been chaotic and confusing. Democratic candidates are offering up their party\u2019s full range of choices, from technocratic moderates to progressive populists.<\/p>\n
Times Opinion assembled a panel of experts <\/a> with a range of viewpoints for a new installment of The Choice, aimed at guiding voters \u2014 and in California, especially Democratic voters \u2014 through the complex issues in this election.<\/p>\n The Choice was prepared by Times Opinion editors, based in part on a round-table conversation with the panelists held on April 24 and a survey from which Times Opinion averaged the panelists\u2019 responses.<\/p>\n Our Panel\u2019s Ratings We asked panelists to rate the leading candidates on how they would approach governing. Each chart reflects an average of their individual ratings.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n What do you think about the overall slate of candidates and the situation for Democrats right now?<\/p>\n Angie Wei California consultant<\/p>\n It\u2019s been the most interesting thing that I\u2019ve watched in my time in California politics. The field being so wide and so big makes it hard. There\u2019s a lot of noise in the campaign \u2014 makes it hard for voters to focus on issues. So we\u2019re really not making decisions on policies.<\/p>\n Dan Morain California politics journalist<\/p>\n We haven\u2019t had a campaign like this in really a long time in California. This one is still so fluid. The issues seem to matter a lot less. But the issues are so huge. What\u2019s the next governor going to do with high-speed rail? What\u2019s the next governor going to do about the mental health care system?<\/p>\n Addisu Demissie Former campaign manager for Gavin Newsom<\/p>\n We have fine candidates, even good candidates. But I\u2019ve talked with people who\u2019ve worked on these campaigns this year, and just from my own experience in California politics, nobody started the campaign with a statewide profile, especially anything approaching the last three governors: Newsom, Jerry Brown, Arnold Schwarzenegger. One of the reasons the election has largely not been about policy differences is because everyone is just struggling to have people know who they are. Sometimes in campaigns in California, that\u2019s a function of money. But Steyer hasn\u2019t pulled away, despite spending more than $130 million<\/a> as of this recording. I think we\u2019re going to have a pretty fluid race right up until the end.<\/p>\n Tracy Hernandez Civic leader from Los Angeles<\/p>\n I actually find it quite exciting. As someone who wants to activate voters, the fact that the outcome is not preset and predetermined, unlike many statewide California races, I find that to be quite stimulating.<\/p>\n Dan Schnur Political communications professor in Los Angeles<\/p>\n I think voters are beginning to get some clarity: If the state wants to move further left, then Steyer and Porter are providing that option. If the state wants to move to the center, that\u2019s where Matt Mahan and Villaraigosa come in. If the state wants to move far right, then Hilton or Bianco are the answer. And for people who want to stay exactly where we are, Becerra has emerged as the safest and most comforting alternative.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n A lot of these candidates \u2014 Porter, Steyer, Mahan, the Republicans, Eric Swalwell before he dropped out \u2014 don\u2019t have much experience in Sacramento. They haven\u2019t served statewide. Is that a problem or a worry? Could it be an advantage? California has a lot of challenges.<\/p>\n Mariel Garza Opinion journalist in Los Angeles<\/p>\n It\u2019s notable that up until a few weeks ago, until Swalwell\u2019s sexual misconduct scandal, after which he exited the race, that he on the Democratic side and Steve Hilton on the Republican side were the leading candidates for their parties. These are people who, if you rank all the candidates in terms of experience, they come down near the bottom. But what they had that other people didn\u2019t have is a certain celebrity. They were regular talking heads on Fox News and MS NOW. It\u2019s not like Hollywood celebrity, but it\u2019s political celebrity. And that\u2019s, I think, why they were at the top. If experience mattered to voters, then you would have had the people who ran state agencies \u2014 Betty Yee, Tony Thurmond \u2014 at the top from the beginning.<\/p>\n Tracy Hernandez Civic leader from Los Angeles<\/p>\n I do think that if you\u2019re a member of Congress or a member of the Legislature, you\u2019re one of a zillion. That\u2019s a different kind of experience than actual, literal power brokering or responsibility, like when you\u2019ve been a C.E.O., you\u2019ve been a mayor. The buck stops with you, which is way different.<\/p>\n Dan Morain California politics journalist<\/p>\n Well, a candidate who has significant experience is Villaraigosa. He was speaker, was mayor of L.A. It\u2019s a big job. He\u2019s struggling at low single digits. I mean, maybe 5 percent.<\/p>\n Angie Wei California consultant<\/p>\n Being an executive is such a different job than being even in the Legislature, or a talking head. California\u2019s a big state. We\u2019ve got big challenges. We as voters should demand more. I thought, for example, we should run scenarios and make these candidates react to one of the crises that\u2019s very real in California: A wildfire starts and is spreading. What are the first five things that you\u2019re going to do? A global pandemic is beginning. What are the first five things that you\u2019re going to do? Test these candidates. We need to push for that, because I can\u2019t tell you how any of them are going to react in a global crisis that\u2019s very likely to hit us in the next four or eight years.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Democrats talk about how central Gov. Gavin Newsom is. People have often praised Jerry Brown\u2019s directness with people about problems. Are there any of these candidates that you\u2019ve seen who could have either of those qualities?<\/p>\n Dan Morain California politics journalist<\/p>\n I do think that Villaraigosa could be a forceful governor. I also think Steyer could be. And certainly, Porter would be forceful. So they would be a presence, without a doubt, as would Hilton.<\/p>\n Sara Sadhwani Politics professor in Los Angeles<\/p>\n I think Steyer and Villaraigosa are not in the likeness of Jerry Brown, but they are willing to be a little bit more straightforward about what the issues are and how they would tackle them. With many of the others, there\u2019s a return to their basic talking points, their stump speech; that doesn\u2019t get voters very far once they start to try and pull back those layers. My sense is that part of the appeal of Steyer is that straight-talk nature he has, or at least a sense of his being willing to take on issues and not being fettered by the Democratic Party or by the interests that perhaps hold other candidates back.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Voting is underway. Can you offer a quick description of a strength and a weakness for a few of the candidates? Let\u2019s start with Xavier Becerra.<\/p>\n Dan Morain California politics journalist<\/p>\n Becerra\u2019s strength is he knows the state. His weakness is he is overly cautious.<\/p>\n Angie Wei California consultant<\/p>\n Becerra has some experience and some relationships in government \u2014 that\u2019s a strength. So far, he\u2019s not answering some questions clearly or consistently. That will create real problems; hopefully, that will even out with more exposure under the bright lights.<\/p>\n Mariel Garza Opinion journalist in Los Angeles<\/p>\n He\u2019s not one to take political risks, which is why he often answers difficult questions with some version of \u201cI\u2019ll look at that.\u201d His strength is that he understands and respects the structure and function of government.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n How about Tom Steyer?<\/p>\n Angie Wei California consultant<\/p>\n His strength is he\u2019s less beholden to interests and can be bold. But he doesn\u2019t have any public sector experience \u2014 no experience in governing, in negotiating with the Legislature and stakeholders, in landing a balanced budget, in responding to unexpected crises.<\/p>\n Dan Morain California politics journalist<\/p>\n He\u2019d be a disrupter. That\u2019s a strength. His weakness is he has made too many promises to too many interest groups.<\/p>\n Dan Schnur Political communications professor in Los Angeles<\/p>\n Either Steyer or Hilton would disrupt Sacramento in a way that hasn\u2019t happened since the invention of the internet. Hilton might pull state government further to the right than Steyer would to the left, but just barely.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Yes, let\u2019s talk a little about Steve Hilton, too. He\u2019s likely to make the runoff. What would be a strength and a weakness of his?<\/p>\n Mariel Garza Opinion journalist in Los Angeles<\/p>\n Hilton\u2019s strength is his accent \u2014 that\u2019s only partly a joke. But that, and his infectious optimism about California, definitely reminds me of another accented immigrant Republican who ran for governor in a crowded, chaotic race, and who got people excited about government. He appears to have the same weakness that plagued Governor Schwarzenegger during his first term: the misguided belief he could accomplish big things without the Democratic Legislature.<\/p>\n Dan Morain California politics journalist<\/p>\n His strength is he\u2019d get along with Trump. His weakness is he\u2019d get along with Trump.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n What about a strength and a weakness for a candidate we haven\u2019t talked about?<\/p>\n Angie Wei California consultant<\/p>\n Porter\u2019s strength is that she\u2019s the most policy-specific and realistic on what can actually get done. She could be a serious executive. A weakness is that she seems to make some bad choices. She might have problems in terms of how she negotiates and builds relationships.<\/p>\n Mariel Garza Opinion journalist in Los Angeles<\/p>\n Villaraigosa\u2019s strength is that he has run a government just as complicated and financially volatile as the State of California \u2014 and did it pretty well, by most accounts. His weakness is that he\u2019s been away from government service for a long time and doesn\u2019t have the alliances he used to have, or hold the same political capital.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Governor Newsom and the Legislature have done a lot to change the politics around housing, and they\u2019ve made a lot of changes on policy, especially regulatory and environmental reform. Many of the candidates are talking<\/a> about continuing some of those policies, like pushing cities to build more, as Newsom has done, or pursuing modular housing.<\/p>\n Would any of these candidates be notably effective at building more housing?<\/strong><\/p>\n Kara Murray Badal Housing expert from Oakland<\/p>\n I don\u2019t think we get to know how capable the candidates are until they\u2019re actually in the seat. But we do understand what the need is in California, right? Building more than 70,000 affordable units<\/a> annually in order to keep up with the demand that exists in the state.<\/p>\n This is a problem that if we don\u2019t address it, the state will continue to crumble. We understand that a governor is probably not going to understand all of the nuances of every portion of housing, but a readiness to be innovative in the space, to lean on expertise and to iterate when we find things out. We\u2019ve passed more than 100 pieces of housing legislation at this point, and we\u2019re still figuring out what is working and what\u2019s not working. Being willing to uptake the new information as it comes and iterate is the essential part for me.<\/p>\n Tracy Hernandez Civic leader from Los Angeles<\/p>\n What is really different is people are up for a reality check. We\u2019ve been very aspirational for the last couple of decades, and things are just not working. People are saying, I can\u2019t rent a home. I have no hope to buy a home. None of our kids that graduate from college are staying here. They\u2019re going.<\/p>\n Mariel Garza Opinion journalist in Los Angeles<\/p>\n A lot of what the candidates are talking about is getting rid of permitting or streamlining permitting or getting rid of regulations, though it\u2019s not clear which ones. But one of the problems is that what a governor can do about housing is really limited, because so much of the housing decisions happen at the local level. We did see a rather significant bill that would change that around transit hubs. And it was fought, tooth and nail, by a lot of cities, including my own, because cities like to decide where housing can happen. But in terms of just getting houses built, that\u2019s a tough one.<\/p>\n Kara Murray Badal Housing expert from Oakland<\/p>\n There are things that a governor can work on, like resolving fragmentation in the building code or thinking about financial risk and liability to encourage industry growth. Specifically, the governor is important to the implementation of the California Housing and Homelessness Agency, which is this nascent housing agency that will go into effect this year and will need a cabinet official to run it. The creation and implementation of that new agency will be really essential for the next governor.<\/p>\n Addisu Demissie Former campaign manager for Gavin Newsom<\/p>\n Housing was the No. 1 issue in the campaign I ran for Governor Newsom in 2017 and \u201918. Then the pandemic happened. I don\u2019t know the policy around housing as well as some others here, but for a governor, it is mostly an issue of prioritization and courage. The problem has persisted, but it\u2019s not necessarily because we lack good policy. We have some great policies. Reforming the California Environmental Quality Act was a third rail in 2017 and \u201918, and we have since done it. But ultimately, one of the big questions we have to ask is: Is the next governor going to make it their No. 1 priority? And will they take on the interests that want to slow down progress?<\/p>\n Tracy Hernandez Civic leader from Los Angeles<\/p>\n I mean, Mahan\u2019s the only one that can prove it. He has the experience of what it takes to build in a city today, not 20 years ago.<\/p>\n Dan Schnur Political communications professor in Los Angeles<\/p>\n As mayors, Mahan and Villaraigosa are the two candidates best qualified to take on the challenge of state and local cooperation.<\/p>\n Kara Murray Badal Housing expert from Oakland<\/p>\n Overall, talking about strengths, housing policy is Porter\u2019s bread and butter. She can hold her own with any specialist and embraces expert research on how to solve the housing crisis. Mahan brings the executive clarity of a mayor who focused his term on housing. His record in San Jose leaves no doubt where he stands. I think there\u2019s a growing fluency that Steyer and Becerra have, which underscores how fluency in housing policy is now the price of entry in California. Their housing policies are an extension of their larger ideologies, and the real test on execution would be the teams they build.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n On homelessness, likewise, Newsom has instituted a number of new programs or policies, such as CARE Court, the program that was initially intended to allow families to compel people into treatment. They have been slow to start<\/a>.<\/p>\n Should the next governor keep with the direction that Newsom has taken? Should he or she change course?<\/strong><\/p>\n Angie Wei California consultant<\/p>\n Every new governor wants to come in and hit their own home run, when in fact, government is a slow-moving beast. It takes time for programs to get implemented and for success and evaluation to happen.<\/p>\n Dan Morain California politics journalist<\/p>\n Newsom has done something that no other governor has done, which is to focus on this issue and direct billions of dollars toward it, in ways that are seen and not seen. But it\u2019s going to take more than one term or two terms of any governor to turn it around. It is a decades-long problem, and it\u2019s not going to get fixed overnight.<\/p>\n California is going to be facing a really tough budget in 2027. The next governor is going to have to confront all these Medicaid cuts. We spend more on health care than many states spend on their entire budgets. The next governor really is going to have a tough time handling health care, which I don\u2019t know that any candidate is particularly addressing. But if you start pulling federal money out of the system, what we see on the streets now and in prisons now won\u2019t get better.<\/p>\n Tracy Hernandez Civic leader from Los Angeles<\/p>\n Newsom made some real headway, and the voters supported it. But the big issue is: Where\u2019s the funding, the backup, the follow-through? Everything in California is about execution, about audit, transparency and follow-through. The idea is we never have a shortage of brilliant ideas. It\u2019s execution.<\/p>\n Kara Murray Badal Housing expert from Oakland<\/p>\n Homelessness is also a housing issue. It\u2019s a supply issue, because there\u2019s not enough housing, because rents are going up. I have heard some of the candidates talking about that fact \u2014 that retaining people in housing is equally important.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n California has set really ambitious climate goals. The state also struggles with high gas and electricity prices, for a variety of reasons. Some of the candidates \u2014 like Villaraigosa and Mahan \u2014 have talked about easing refinery regulation or dialing back the gas tax.<\/p>\n Who in the field is likely to continue with California\u2019s climate goals, and who is likely to perhaps dial them back?<\/strong><\/p>\n Addisu Demissie Former campaign manager for Gavin Newsom<\/p>\n Gas prices are the top concern of folks over and above anything else, because of the Iran war. The cost of living has been the top issue for years. To the extent that climate is perceived to increase the bottom line for voters who are struggling day to day, it will be deprioritized. I also think that\u2019s a false choice, often. And certainly, the majority of the electorate is conscious of the environment.<\/p>\n Kara Murray Badal Housing expert from Oakland<\/p>\n The best thing that we can do is densify in places that already have infrastructure, right? That brings down the cost of transportation and transportation pollution, which is one of the primary drivers of climate issues. It also hopefully puts people closer to transit, puts people closer to their jobs, puts people onto infrastructure that\u2019s already built, hopefully building in places that are established and safe. So in that way, there is true alignment and possibility with the climate goals.<\/p>\n Tracy Hernandez Civic leader from Los Angeles<\/p>\n We\u2019re proud of having the toughest, cleanest goals on climate and water cleanliness and use, and being the best we can be. But what\u2019s different right now is the appetite and demand for all the above. Now, people are saying: We want the goals, but let\u2019s maybe put them on a timeline that keeps up with technology, the transition that doesn\u2019t blow up costs.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Steyer is an ardent climate activist, but he wants to build more homes. He says he can bring environmentalists along with him in this. Does that seem achievable?<\/p>\n Mariel Garza Opinion journalist in Los Angeles<\/p>\n If you build housing in cities around transit corridors, that\u2019s exactly what environmentalists are seeking. From my perspective, it\u2019s probably the smartest way to build.<\/p>\n But I was reflecting on Hilton, who is the leading candidate in polling across the board. Obviously, there\u2019s a lot of weird dynamics going on there. But he\u2019s the only one who\u2019s saying: \u201cI\u2019m going to get rid of all the environmental regulations. We\u2019re going to build single-family homes everywhere, as opposed to densification. Today, we\u2019re going to start oil production. We\u2019re going to fire up our peaker plants that burn coal and forget the clean energy, basically.\u201d And it\u2019ll be really interesting to see how he does. I suspect he\u2019s going to get more than just a small group of Republicans supporting him, because there are people who are like: \u201cYou know what, we\u2019ve done all these environmental things. The air looks fine to me. Let\u2019s do something for me now.\u201d<\/p>\n Sara Sadhwani Politics professor in Los Angeles<\/p>\n There\u2019s a dimension here that we\u2019re missing. For young people, this is not a choice. They have grown up with extreme heat. They\u2019ve grown up with wildfires. Hilton and Bianco have said we\u2019re going back to drilling. We\u2019re going to bring more oil into California. We\u2019re going to extract oil in California. But that is not, I think, what younger voters are looking for, and I don\u2019t even think it\u2019s much of a choice, whether on the left or right, for younger voters.<\/p>\n Dan Schnur Political communications professor in Los Angeles<\/p>\n My students look at the Iran war as a climate change issue. They understand that with the Strait of Hormuz closing, China\u2019s emergence and this country\u2019s lack of preparation to provide alternative energy infrastructure are a fundamental threat. While many voters have deprioritized climate and environmental policy as part of the broader affordability debate, young people, who know that they will not own a home for decades, if ever, are now even more fervent in their focus on climate. The great irony is that Donald Trump may be the American politician who re-triggers climate change as a top-tier issue for Gen Z.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n If California\u2019s budget challenges continue, based on how the candidates have campaigned, who would be more likely to cut spending or raise taxes, or fall somewhere in between?<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Let\u2019s talk about the wealth tax, the proposed one-time 5 percent tax on people with more than $1 billion in assets. It will likely be on the ballot this fall. Primarily, the proceeds would offset the Medicaid reductions that Congress put into place. Almost the entire field opposes it. If it makes the ballot, do you think it will pass, and should it?<\/p>\n Angie Wei California consultant<\/p>\n Addressing income inequality and the wealth gap is absolutely what we should be doing. But I think people recognize that a one-time tax increase is not a solution to our structural challenges in California. It may actually cause more problems than it solves. What does one-time money do for us? The other piece of this is it\u2019s pretty clear that this is going to be litigated. So can we actually hang our hopes and dreams of keeping people covered under Medi-Cal and other health care programs on something that the courts are going to tie up?<\/p>\n Addisu Demissie Former campaign manager for Gavin Newsom<\/p>\n I mean, the answer is no; it\u2019s bad policy. And no, it probably isn\u2019t going to pass. But I understand why it is popular, especially in a primary moment, because billionaires are very unpopular. If Steyer doesn\u2019t win, one of the reasons might be because despite being a populist billionaire, the billionaire part of that might outweigh the populist part of that.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Artificial intelligence is the biggest story in the economy. People are worried about A.I. taking jobs and pushing back against data centers. At the same time, Big Tech\u2019s success is part of the California story and helps power the state budget.<\/p>\n Who would be more likely to leave the A.I. industry alone and who would be more like to try to regulate A.I.?<\/strong><\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Should California be more worried about an A.I. bubble that pops and causes real problems for the budget? Or should California be more worried about A.I. taking a lot of jobs away?<\/p>\n Dan Morain California politics journalist<\/p>\n Yes to both.<\/p>\n Addisu Demissie Former campaign manager for Gavin Newsom<\/p>\n I agree. Wherever they are on the political spectrum, voters are pretty uniformly in the same place here, which is: I understand the promise, but I\u2019m terrified that it\u2019s going to take away my job, my industry. I want government to do something about it.<\/p>\n Now, is that the state government of California or the federal government? It\u2019s likely a federal issue. But we are the home of the industry, and I think that\u2019s the fundamental reason why it\u2019s probably not being debated in the governor\u2019s race as much as it perhaps should be. By the time we get to the general election, it might be a bigger issue, and certainly by the time we get to 2028. We\u2019re in a hockey stick situation on this issue. As we all know in our own industries and in our own lives, it has gone from, oh, this is a cute thing, to something we all use daily. But it\u2019s coming. And certainly, the next governor is going to have to deal with it.<\/p>\n Angie Wei California consultant<\/p>\n The impact of A.I. on jobs is going to be a bigger impact on our state budget over time than anything else, much more so than an A.I. bubble. I am so glad that I\u2019m at the end of my career and not at the beginning, because we should be worried about the jobs and the job quality in the years to come.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Navigating the relationship with President Trump is a major issue of governance now. Newsom has been quite combative, of course, during Trump\u2019s second term. On the other end of the spectrum you have somebody like Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, who\u2019s negotiated a bit, and then Republicans, who have mostly just cooperated.<\/p>\n Who in this field would be more likely to always oppose Trump? Who would be more likely to negotiate with him or even work with him?<\/strong><\/p>\n Sara Sadhwani Politics professor in Los Angeles<\/p>\n It is a complicated topic, because the State of California \u2014 any state, quite frankly \u2014 has so many issues that they interface with the federal government on. So if we take it from the immigration standpoint, California will most likely take a confrontational approach to the Trump administration, because we are home to so many immigrants, and the ICE raids have hit us in such drastic ways. That said, we\u2019ve just spent the last hour or so talking about the real dire economic straits of the State of California. In that regard, the governor of California cannot take such a confrontational approach. There has to be a level of pragmatism in order to make sure that we\u2019re able to pull down as many dollars from the federal government as possible.<\/p>\n Tom K. Wong Political science professor in San Diego<\/p>\n California has led, since Trump won, when it comes to pushing back against Trump-style immigration policies, from defending DACA to defending our sanctuary state law to now trying to unmask ICE. So we are among the most prominent plaintiffs across immigration-related cases. Even though immigration is not one of the front-burner issues for voters, it very well could be if L.A. is targeted again, if there is a Minneapolis-style enforcement that happens in California. Because of our large foreign-born population, because one in five<\/a> of our children in California live in mixed-status families, immigration can catapult at any moment to a front-burner issue, which is why the expectation is that our leadership, especially a Democratic governor, would be aggressive and fight back.<\/p>\n Kara Murray Badal Housing expert from Oakland<\/p>\n This is more from my organizer perspective: I certainly don\u2019t want our unifying cries to be on the backs of our neighbors, but the ability to rally people around an issue is really important. I think it\u2019s less of a, \u201cDo I want my governor to fight back?\u201d But it\u2019s like, I want my governor to help me feel safe inside of my state. If that can be used to catalyze that kind of energy, it could be really powerful for the candidate or for the next governor.<\/p>\n Times Opinion<\/p>\n Immigration is a core conflict with the administration. Are there things that the next governor should be doing differently on immigration? The Legislature has tried different things, like mask bans for ICE<\/a>.<\/p>\n Tom K. Wong Political science professor in San Diego<\/p>\n California and blue states and cities across the country are trying to figure out ways to limit immigration enforcement to the extent that we have seen in Chicago, Minneapolis and elsewhere.<\/p>\n