Democrat and Republican vote buttons. (Image: vectorfusionart/Shutterstock)
Final Election Results Are Here at Last, and California’s GOP is Still in Decline
A generation of voters have come of age since 2000, thoroughly indoctrinated to despise Republicans
By Edward Ring, December 20, 2022 6:51 am
On December 16, nearly 40 days after the November mid-term elections, California’s Secretary of State finally released the “Statement of Vote.” This document is the official and final record of the winners and losers. What is belatedly certain is what we knew all along. California’s GOP did not arrest the catastrophic slide that defines its performance so far in the 21st century.
Before covering what by any objective standard was a dismal performance overall, it is appropriate to highlight a few bright spots. California’s GOP delegation to the U.S. Congress increased from 11 members to 12, although the real turnaround, or perhaps “mini-turnaround” is more apt, was in 2020 when the GOP’s congressional caucus representing California had bounced back up to 11 from the rock-bottom 7 members that had survived the 2018 election.
With the single uptick logged this November, these 12 Republicans represent 23 percent of California’s 52 member Congressional delegation.
Notable in the GOP’s incremental gain this year was the victory of John Duarte, a newcomer to politics who in a fight for an open seat edged out the formidable Adam Gray, a moderate Democrat who had already served five terms in the state assembly. In a bruising fight, Duarte edged Gray by 564 votes in the 13th District, where 43 percent of voters are registered Democrats, versus only 28 percent registered Republicans.
Gaining one seat in the U.S. Congress was the one welcome bit of contradictory data in what was otherwise a complete downward slide. The GOP remained excluded from all eight higher offices, where the margins of victory for the Democratic candidates were ridiculous – Governor 59.2%, Lt. Governor 59.7%, Secretary of State 60.1%, Controller 55.3%, Treasurer 58.8%, Attorney General 59.1%, Insurance Commissioner 59.9%, and Superintendent of Public Instruction 63.7%.
In the State Assembly, where all 80 seats were up for grabs, the GOP minority shrank from 19 seats to 18 seats, and in the Senate, where 40 seats were contested, the GOP minority shrank from 9 seats to 8 seats. It really can’t get much worse. The GOP controls 23 percent of the seats in the Assembly, and a mere 20 percent of the seats in the Senate. California is a one party state.
To put this unrelenting century-to-date GOP slide into context, in 2000 the GOP held 30 seats in the State Assembly, 14 seats in the State Senate, and 20 seats in the U.S. Congress. That’s still pretty bad, but if, for example, you hold 14 seats in the 40 seat State Senate, and 30 seats in the Assembly, your minorities are 35 percent and 38 percent, respectively. This means that in 2000, in both houses of the state legislature, the Republicans could prevent the Democrats from exercising the prerogatives of a two-thirds majority. Today, the GOP isn’t even within striking distance of regaining a one-third share of seats. They would have to gain 9 seats in the Assembly and 5 seats in the Senate.
If the entire story of the last two decades weren’t steady decline, picking up enough seats to acquire a one-third share in both houses might seem more likely, but another trend belies much hope. The GOP’s share of registered voters also shows a perfect record of step-by-step decline. From 35 percent in 2000 to 34 percent by 2006, then down to 31 percent in 2008, dropping to 29 percent in 2012, 28 percent in 2014, 26 percent in 2016, and since then plateaued at 24 percent. Less than one in four registered voters in California are Republicans.
One might see good news insofar as at a glance, at least 24 percent roughly mirrors the share of seats California’s Republicans occupy in the state legislature and the U.S. Congress, but that misses what is perhaps the most discouraging fact of all; Democratic candidates are securing the support of the vast majority of independent voters in the state. Democrats represent a commanding 47 percent of registered voters, but the other 29 percent are independents. In most races, for every independent voter a Republican attracts, the Democrats are attracting two or three.
The story gets even worse when taking into account the growth in the absolute number of California’s registered voters this century. In 2000, there were 15.7 million registered voters, and 5.4 million were Republicans. In 2022, the total number of registered voters had swelled to 21.9 million, and – get ready – 5.2 million were Republicans. The quantity of registered Republicans in California has declined over the past twenty years, while at the same time, the Democrats increased their registrants by over 3 million, from 7.1 million in 2000 to 10.3 million in 2022.
The failure of California’s Republican party, according to apologists for its slide into oblivion, is attributable to everything except their own leadership and management. The impossible stigma of Trump. The lingering stain of Prop. 187 all the way back in 1994, approved by voters, that denied state funded healthcare to illegal immigrants except in emergency cases. The unforgivable sin of Prop. 8, approved as well by voters in 2008, which banned gay marriage. Ever since these propositions were supported, mostly by Republicans, the GOP has been mercilessly portrayed by every Democrat, every liberal educator, and every major media property as both racist and homophobic. It has worked. A generation of voters have come of age since 2000, thoroughly indoctrinated to despise Republicans.
Excuses abound. Democrats in California now wield a political machine funded by public sector unions and abetted by every wealthy individual and powerful institution in the state, including major corporations ran by directors that would be out of their minds to challenge the narrative. This machine, this political juggernaut, has now seized upon climate change, a woman’s right to choose, and, of course, gender politics in all of its bizarre permutations, as further examples of Republican barbarism.
Topping off all these excuses for failure is the demographic trope. More than ever, California is now a minority-majority state, and minorities don’t vote Republican. Between 2000 and 2020, Hispanics increased from 32 percent of the state’s total population to 39 percent, while non-Hispanic whites dropped from 40 percent to 35 percent. Asians went from 11 percent up to 15 percent, and African Americans dropped marginally from 6 percent to 5 percent.
This is all daunting and sounds convincing, particularly when it is being recited by people whose jobs depend on making the case that they confront impossible circumstances that are beyond their control. But it’s old news. And for anyone serious about bringing vitality back to the California GOP, it’s irrelevant. The failures of the Democrats in every metric that matters to voters is a fact that supersedes all of the California GOP’s supposedly disqualifying history or demographic headwinds, all stereotypes and fearmongering, all indoctrination, and all the money and professional messaging the machine can muster.
In public education, transportation, water, energy, housing, homelessness, crime, forest management, cost-of-living, high taxes, and – coming soon – another round of budget deficits, the Democrats have made a mess. That levels the playing field. Republicans will start winning again when they have the courage to promote solutions that match the scale of the problems. That will not arise from the brainy recesses of well heeled consultancies and tepid focus groups. It will arise from new leaders who aren’t afraid to challenge fundamental premises and offer uncompromising alternatives.
- Ringside: Finding Water for the San Joaquin Valley - December 5, 2024
- Ringside: Californian Energy Use Compared to the USA and the World - November 29, 2024
- Ringside: The Numbers Driving California vs. Washington on Energy, Water & Forestry - November 21, 2024
RELATED ARTICLES
-
October 19, 2020 -
November 4, 2020 -
January 18, 2022
Democrats have rigged elections for years in California so there’s that also?
Appreciate the final roundup and analysis of our latest election, a complex subject. It seems it happened so long ago that it’s like a distant memory, and obviously that’s a huge problem all on its own.
Unfortunately, as with sketchy Covid numbers, it has become impossible to sort out what is true and what is false. For instance, registration party totals are often used as a foundation to argue that California is a deep blue state. But for years and years our state and county office holders have made such a mess, whether purposely or through incompetence that, unless I’m missing something, we don’t even know what the true party registration numbers are. If so, false numbers are a crumbly foundation to build on.
Which leads to, as Samantha noted, the shameless Dem election rigging —- in all of its many forms —- that has been going on for decades and has now become impossible to ignore.
For starters, I would like to see an end to the system of open primaries, which were initially promoted by certain Republicans as a means to get more “moderate” candidates elected. However, what’s really needed is a concerted grassroots effort to appeal to the independents and disaffected conservatives who no longer bother to participate in the electoral process. Ambassador Grenell’s Fix California initiative has the right approach and has started gain some traction. There needs to be clear, consistent and focused messaging and solutions to the state’s problems that actually resonate with the public. Lot’s of low hanging fruit there (crime, homelessness, excessive regulation, crumbling infrastructure, failing public education, high taxes and housing costs). In addition, the GOP has to be willing to play better hardball than the Democrats, such as ballot harvesting, which proved effective in the Orange County congressional races.
Why the state Republican party fell into irrelevance over the last three decades. Well we have a whole bunch of reasons.
1) Demographics. The recession of the early 1990’s started the hemorrhage of the traditional voter base. By this stage several million traditional conservative voters have moved out of state. Due to the economic death spiral (cause by regulation) of most traditional California industries.
2) The Amnesty of 1986 and then the great Prop 187 Fiasco. A Fiasco because Prop 187 caused the Mexican government to change the rules of land ownership in Mexico so that duel citizens could now buy land. Until 1994 the naturalization rate among Mexicans was very low mainly due to land ownership laws in Mexico. After 1994 naturalization rates took off very quickly and that added a few million new Dem voters who had their political expectations trained by PRI. The natural clients for a clientist party. No Prop 187, no change in Mexican land law. And at least one or two million fewer Dem voters. A lot of those are the loss margin in quiet a few Assembly districts. And Congressional Seats.
3) Not backing B2 Bob Dornan in 1994 in his attempts to overturn his defeat for reelection due to illegal / ineligible voters. If the Republican Party had backed Dornan aggressively at the beginning and got the result quickly overturned then the state Democratic Party would have not become as aggressive as it did in stealing so many district elections in the decades since.
4) Motor Voter. A charter for voter fraud pure and simple. And the latest version makes it even more blatant. Just look at historical voter reg patters in places like LA county in the last decade. Many 100K’s of new mystery registered Dem voters unsupported by underlying demographics. Or patterns in surrounding areas. Why no lawsuits?
5) The catastrophic political disaster that is Prop 13. Yes I know the full back story. But if it had not passed in 1978 Sacramento eventually would have cobbled together something that would have given big discounts to residential property again.
Prop 13 did not rein in state and country spending as claimed. Quiet the opposite. But more importantly the repeal of Prop 13 would be a huge wedge issue for the Dem Party as one of its core demographics, Gentry Democrats who live in very well heeled suburbs, are quickly converted to Fiscal Conservatism. The fact that despite their super-majorities the Dem Party never dared touch Prop 13 show just how politically toxic the subject is for the Party.
Until the state Republican Party starts pushing for the repeal of Prop 13 it will remain a marginal irrelevant party at the state level. Because Prop 13 is the only weapon that can very seriously injure the state Dem Party voter base unity. And they know it. If you want to win elections you gotta to use the best weapons to hand.
After you have destroyed the unity of the other side then you can work out a much fairer property tax system. One tied to income and ability to pay. Not current notional asset value.
Well on Prop 13. I wouldn’t blame 13 for not reigning in spending. That was the Democrats that made and passed those crazy budgets.
@Thomas Cole
When you look at the coalition that passed Prop 13 in 1978 one part was the people who had a huge ramp up in property tax during the previous few years due to the change in commercial property tax assessment rules and the more than tripling of residential property prices during the 1970’s.
But the other part, the people who got the Prop over the line, were those who were aghast at the huge ramp up in county, city and state spending on the back of the vastly increased property tax revenue and the huge build out of a welfare state. Plus the huge large number of new state employees to spend this money.
All through the 1980’s and into the 1990’s I kept hearing this as the main reason why Prop 13 was a good thing. That Prop 13 was a huge win for Fiscal Conservatism. But by the late 1990’s it became very obvious it had had little impact and spending, especially state spending, just accelerated. Which due to the pro cyclical nature of state tax revenue mean that about once a decade, every recession, the state basically went bankrupt.
Which is where we are today. No effective Republican Party. Immensely wasteful state and city spending. And very low property tax assessments are now an inheritable right. For t he children of property owners. I know people who own small apartments who pay far more property tax than than people who inherited large mansions in places like Tiburon and Santa Barbara. Paying property taxes on assessments from many decades ago. The people who inherited the mansions are all classic Gentry Democrats. Who would soon change their politics if they had to pay property tax on full current market assessed value and they saw just how profligate their tax was being wasted.
Those are interesting points but none of it changes the fact that taxpayers have to pay into a system that programs Pre-K thru Ph.D. that the DNC is good and the GOP is evil. The system works exactly as it wanted. The primary purpose of the education system is to crank out Party Loyalists that keep them in power. Also..what percentage of attorneys (courts) are Democrats? 90%. How can you even change the school situation unless you capture the courts?
Mr Ring. Great rundown of the numbers and reasons. We are in agreement that the school system has been turning out little marxists for 20 years now and the results are in. Bad. So we are attacking this indoctrination by showing its worst attributes to the parents, to flip them to the right. What other strategy do we have? https://rumble.com/v20u14h-porn-in-schools-and-crt.html
Quite simply, it doesn’t matter right now for the GOP at all. They could run a candidate for a statewide office or in one of the coastal areas who supported all the wacky stuff the Dems do, but because they have that (R) next to their name on the ballot, they will still only get around 35% of the votes. We have seen this time and time again. Heck, you can’t even run a person with an (I) next to their name and get anywhere as we just saw with Michael Shellenberger (who was our best bet at getting rid of Hairdo). For 60%+ of CA voters, it’s the (D) or bust. That’s how entrench the cult is here (and it IS a religion for most of these people). We live in a bizarre state were everyone loves to complain about how bad everything is (and it is) but 60% of these people will just keep on voting for the exact same people who have caused all this misery. It’s why the whole proposition circus every election cycle is so hilarious as voters strike down the very things the people they elected are pushing for. The main problem isn’t just that the GOP has been rendered irrelevant via coordinated slander, but that the Dem politicians have become far more radical than the majority of their constituents. So, we end up with terrible, unworkable policies that 70%+ of the population hates because of the devastation they cause. That being said, I don’t know how any of this can be reversed. The entrenched Democrat machine in the major population centers show no sign of being halted. The only solace most of us have is that California is a vast state and there are still plenty of regions, such as the Inland Empire, Central Valley and the Foothills where there local control is still largely in the hands of the GOP and common sense, moderate Dems (the few that still exist) and are thus insulated from much of the madness that occurs in the rest of the state. Only problem is that many of us are looking for greener pastures and it’s only a matter of time before we make our exit as well.
And on the topic of Prop 13, it’s one of the few “sane” policies that the state has which protects citizens from the enormous cost of living that is otherwise present in the state. I just don’t see the CAGOP making any effort to repeal, let alone change, this as it would be seen as a major betrayal by their own voters. The fact is most GOP voters in the state are home and business owners who would massively impact by any major increase in property taxes. The Dems, being the party of choice for renters, are far more likely to be the ones who will attempt to get rid of it (and yes, ending Prop 13 will also mean massive increases in the prices for rents in the state, but as always, Dem voters never put 1 and 1 together…if they did, we wouldn’t be in the mess that we are now).
Great, and thoughtful assessment, Otakuon!
The Cal GOP leadership appears to have been bought off. They are the designated losers. They seem to have found something they are good at. 😉
@Otakuon
Unless you have lived in the same house for many decades or inherited the house (and the tax assessment) from parents the Prop 13 discount is not going to be much. Based on property prices changes in the Bay Area to take just one example only those who bough 25 plus years ago are getting an appreciable discount. Basically you have to own property through at least two property bubble cycles before you pay appreciable less in property tax than one based on current market value assessment (like in places such as Seattle).
The GOP voters who in past decades benefited from the Prop 13 discount are now either retiring (mostly out of state) or dying. For the high property value areas in the state getting rid of Prop 13 will not lose many GOP voters. Because there are not many left. But it will hurt and hurt badly very large numbers of complacent affluent Dem voters. If the GOP want to make the state competitive again then it has to stop this obsession with Prop 13 of now almost 50 years ago which is only of benefit to a quickly declining number of its voting base but whose removal will do very serious harm to the opposition and put the state in play again.
Prop 13 is just like rent control. An economic zero sum game. Its just a subsidy of current owner / tenants by future owners / tenants. Because thats how its worked for the last 40 plus years.
It all comes down to do you want to win elections or do you just want to make a Statement. Of little benefit to most potential swing voters and only relevant to a quickly declining rump of your current voters. As the old saying goes – Want to make a statement, then use Western Union..
@Tfourier, I believe your analysis of the Prop 13 effect is a practical one. The CAGoP and Republicans in general, need to start fighting fire with fire. In addition to changing their stance on Prop 13, they need to change their “vote only in person” doctrine, and embrace “mail in voting”, “early voting” and “ballot harvesting” (all legalized in California). Start using these same weapons against the Democrats. When Democrats start feeling the pain from their own devices, they will suddenly become “aware” of the need for “election reform”. The only way for this to happen, imo, is for a change in leadership at the TOP – the CAGop and RNC.
Among the comments here are an interesting debate over Prop. 13. It is true that the primary beneficiaries of Prop. 13 are millions of complacent seniors, almost all of them Democrats. But the principle of Prop. 13 is that over time, in real dollars, a family’s property tax burden declines. This rewards holding on to the investment and it recognizes that once people retire they are less able to afford property taxes. It protects long-time homeowners from the real estate bubbles engineered by overregulation which has caused a housing shortage. Let’s fix that.
Before tampering with Prop. 13, it would be helpful to understand exactly what is behind the explosion in per capita state general fund spending in just the past ten years. Inflation adjusted per capita general fund spending in California has increased from $3,124 back in 2013, to $6,023 today. California’s state government is spending twice as much money today per resident as it did just ten years ago. Where is this money going? For what? What were our state officials doing so efficiently ten years ago, that they can no longer do today?
@Edward Ring
I’ve been following the Prop 13 story (and state budgets) since the 1980’s. Although there was some reasonable coverage of the background in the local media of the time it was a deep dive through old issues of the (sorely missed) California Journal that filled in the real background and retail politics of the time in the lead up to 1978. You can find a complete run of issues from 1970 to 2005 here. . https://www.unz.com/print/CalJournal/. Plus the published biographies of the key players of the time fill in some very interesting details of the what and why.
The passing of Prop 13 was the result of a unique set of circumstances in the late 1970’s. Court ordered changes in assessment rules due to corruption by city officials. A unique 400% plus increase in property prices in less than 6 years due to high inflation, very lax lending rules, and changes in zoning laws and anti-development regulations. And Jerry Browns typically incompetent handling of the property tax question in Sacrament in the 18 month prior to Prop 13. It was not the result of some wider political change in the state voter. As what happened in 1911. If any of those three had not happened, no Prop 13 filed.
In the 1980’s and 1990’s once passed Prop 13 was of vital importance politically to the GOP. By 2000 it was marginal. Since 2010 its not only irrelevant but unwillingness to use it as a weapon against the Dem Party, its the perfect wedge issue, doomed the state GOP to electoral irrelevance. Some people claim that it was Prop 187 that doomed the GOP in California but when you compare it with the evolution of the GOP in Texas you cant help but notice that the sort of people who vote GOP in Texas are quite happy to vote for high spending Dem politicians in California because Prop 13 has insulated them from the true cost of their votes. That’s a big voting block in California. Big enough to swing a lot of Assembly and Senate seats. Quite apart from Congressional districts.
The utter dysfunction of the state budget is another matter. I’m looking at a 30 to 40 year perspective. In the 1970’s and 1980’s it was still very much the build and maintain useful infrastructure budget. As it had been since the 1950. But in the 1990’s it pivoted to spend money to support welfare programs and on welfare to buy votes.
The 40% spent on public schools is very much in that category. Doubling the expenditure in real terms has dropped education results from average to almost worst state. It was Serrano v. Priest and then Teachers Union collective bargaining rights that collapsed the quality of the Californian public education system. Handed what had been a locally controlled system into the hands of Sacramento and the Teachers Union. And why it has been terrible value for money since the 1980’s. But of course the Dems blame everything on Prop 13 even though the very serious problems with public education were already very obvious before 1978. The collapse of SF Unified being just one example.
The other big money items in the budget, MediCal and various “income support” programmes, as structured are absolutely guaranteed to be riddled with fraud and waste. They are designed that way. And given the Sacramento Capital House merry go round due to term limits thats only going to be changed by a concerted attack through law suits and civil grand juries. The State Constitution and Home Rule municipal case law might provide some very fertile lines of attack. But it will have to be a layered attack. Thats the only one that will work in the long run.
This is always the problem with the Prop 13 debate. It’s a chicken or the egg sort of situation. You can’t talk about changing Prop 13 until you address the out of control home prices in the state which is caused by over regulation and high labor/material costs which leads to a lack of supply. Sure, you can argue that because of Prop 13 cities would rather zone for commercial than residential to reap the sales tax dollars, but cities and school districts already get around Prop 13 by tacking on CFDs (aka mello-roos taxes). Many cities would love to build out more housing developments but are hamstrung by things such as CEQA and a myriad assortment of other state laws that make building homes in this state very difficult and expensive compared to other states. And even though I have only owned my house for around 3 years now vs my mother who has owned hers for 40+, I have already seen how Prop 13 protects me from the rapid increases in home values this state experiences. The value of my home has already increased by 20% since my wife and I purchased it in 2020 and there is no way I could absorb an increased tax assessment that would happen without Prop 13 which pegs my taxes to the price I paid for the house. For someone like my mom who lives on about $3,000 month, she would have to sell her house if Prop 13 was ended. Also remember that Prop 13 and the subsequent laws related to it also limit the amount that property taxes can be raised in a given year. So without all of that, the sky’s the limit and many people would find themselves quickly taxed out of their houses. Really, the best thing about Prop 13 is that it gives homeowners a sense of certainty that they won’t be faced with a massive hike in their property tax bills from one year to the next as happens in other states. Yes there are consequences of Prop 13, just as their are for any law, but right now, given the state of housing in California, it’s benefits currently outweigh those.
And honestly, even if the GOP ran on a platform of reforming Prop 13, it still wouldn’t get them anywhere as they are still Republicans. As I mentioned in my original post and as this article points out, 60%+ of voters in this state will NEVER vote Republican….they will only ever vote Democrat even if doing so means higher taxes, higher cost of living, more crime, etc. This is how entrenched the Democrats are in the state and how “toxic” the Republican name is among general voters who have been conditioned over decades by the media propagandists to reflexively cringe the moment they see or hear the word “Republcians” . So there really is no point for the GOP to even try. Our only hope is to try and hold on to those parts of the state that are still mostly Red for as long as possible and resist as much of the Democrat nonsense coming out of Sacramento that we can via the courts and ballot initiates.
Perhaps CONSERVATIVES should consider registering as Democrats (a la Rick Caruso) and actually make many of the brain-dead, low-information voters in this state actually PAY ATTENTION to the candidate’s platforms, and remove the auto-fill on the (D) slot…
If they’re gonna run a “one-party” state, perhaps it behooves California to start running a hard slate of “Blue Dog” Democrats??? Interesting thought – would be interested in getting Mr. Ring’s response to that idea – it’s nice to see him weighing in our our commentary!
Also wondering if the “One California” secession movement has any traction with anyone here??? All I know is, I’m BEYOND SICK AND TIRED of being subjected to asinine legislation like that proposed by Scott Weiner and rest of the weiners out of San Francisco and their La Raza counterparts in the MeChA movement out of El Lay and San Diego….
– Agree with Raymond on the GOP needs “to change their ‘vote only in person’ doctrine, and embrace ‘mail in voting’, ‘early voting’ and ‘ballot harvesting’ (all legalized in California). Start using these same weapons against the Democrats.”
– U.S. Rep. Mike Garcia (R) won by 500 votes two years ago. This year, in a new district that has a greater percentage of Democrats, Garcia won by nearly 13,000 votes. He had great messaging, talked to voters and organized a ballot harvesting operation that banked votes early. In Florida, the GOP there also banked votes early and more Republicans voted before election day than Democrats. Ric Grenell’s Fix California has been making a difference in registering new voters and the CAGOP took the right tiny step with its promise to California to share where the Republican party stands on issues. For too long, they have been too timid for fear of “offending”. It’s time they build on that and share where they stand on issues and what their solutions are, rather than letting the Democrats define them. They need to be active daily on social media as well as hold daily pressers to present their solutions. This won’t turn California red overnight, but it can make it more purple.
For too long, they have been too timid for fear of “offending”.
@JJ, this has been a problem with Republican campaign messaging and I believe you are right in pointing the finger at the “consultants” who advise the candidates. If I could choose one word to describe the Republican candidates in my district for as long as I can remember, that word would be “bland”. And its the same candidates over and over who keep losing. The “firebrands” who try for it end up not getting the support of the local party; because the CALGoP sets the standard for them. Their motto is “Any Republican is better than a Democrat” but that is not a true statement. Any Republican WHO CAN WIN is better than a Democrat. Republicans in California need to take a cue from DJT and, as you say, stop worrying about “offending”: https://pjmedia.com/columns/kevindowneyjr/2022/12/19/why-you-need-to-stop-worrying-and-love-trump-again-n1654859.
@ otakuon
Totally agree on the zoning / regulation issue. It at least doubles the cost of residential property. But not in the way you might think. Property bubbles are not the rise and fall of the price of the house. They are a rise and fall in the value of the land the property is built on. The value of the house is the replacement value. Cost to rebuild. That changes little apart from the march of inflation over the decades. Per sq foot, as is replacement. It the value of the plot that has gone up several hundred per cent over the decades.
When you start thinking of property bubbles and property prices distortions as pure a land value issue (and you explain it that way to people) then the true cause of the situation with property prices since the late 1960’s becomes very obvious. In SF the simplest way of derailing the usual excuses (and “solutions”) given by “low income housing” activists is to say – You want 1965 rental levels and property values then you can only have that with the 1965 zoning ordinances, lending laws and regulations. Or even better, the 1935 ones. They always go silent for some reason. Look at when almost all the mid and high density residential building in the City was done. Before 1965. Look at what rents were back then. And property prices.
They had never worked out that when the value of a city plot goes up you subdivide this by more and more units to keep the cost per unit constant. By updensity. If you dont the increase value is subdivided by the original density units, so total cost per unit goes up several hundred percent. Or if you slow / stop development in the inner suburbs people now move to the outer suburbs. You get worse sprawl. Or stay in the city core and drive up demand. And prices.
This is very basic stuff. Which seems to be totally beyond the current generation of NIMBY’s and their idiot spawn.
As for your mother and people in her position, that was being taken care of in an ad hoc way before Prop 13 passed. Depending on city, county. Property tax discounts based on fixed income and long time ownership. That was one of the items being discussed in the Assembly at the time. How to make fixed income property tax discounts statewide and consistent. But the Assembly moved very slow due to Brown and it was killed by Prop 13.
So there is a viable and practical solution for retired and other fixed income facing a very large property tax based on a market assessment when most of the assessment is due to price appreciation. Pretty much the same as the Prop 13 discount but only for those on a fixed income. Everyone else who currently gets the Prop 13 discount, they pay full market. They can afford it.
You want a way to get rid of Prop 13 that hurts the Dem party but does not give the government a huge tax windfall. You just take the current property tax income for city, county and make that the benchmark income that is used to reassess the property tax rate for all property. $x income divided by $y total market assessed value gives new rate. Which will be a lot less that 1% in a lot of places due to the cross subsidy. So newer owners pay less tax, the Prop 13 discount people who arent on fixed incomes now pay a fair share of tax. And fixed income people keep paying Prop 13 discount level taxes, due to the fixed income / low term appreciation discount.
And you keep the rate of inflation cap. To stop the cites / counties pushing the rate quickly back up to 1% to get a tax windfall. Which will be wasted. Guaranteed.
Now the way you get that through is to come up with a way of playing on divisions in the Dem Party in the State House on the issue. Then use their super majorities against them. Corner them with their own rhetoric. Sell it as a Fair Tax measure with the fixed income protection and you could get it through. And I’m sure a “Civil Rights” angle could be created. Always a winner when you can skewer the Dems with their own rhetoric. Given the way Prop 13 is written it will get a bit messy but the key thing is all the blame for getting rid of it can be pushed on the Dem Party. If done properly. By getting them to frame it as a great victory for the party.
With Dems responsible for getting rid of Prop 13 the core Rep voters will be mad as hell with the Dems. So they are not going anywhere. But just wait for the independents and Gentry Democrats to start peeling off once the new property tax bills start arriving and for the first time in decades they start paying attention to how their very large new tax bill is being wasted in Sacramento. The- I’ll never Vote GOP – people soon change their mind when its their greatly increased tax money on the line. And they see what terrible value for money it is. You want the GOP to take the state back or even just become relevant again then Earl Warren is the model, not Ronald Regan. We now live in an Earl Warren state, not a Ronald Reagan state. No matter how nice a place that once was.
Repealing Prop 13 if handled correctly could be huge a win / win political situation for the GOP. Maybe eventually they will work this out. Lets hope not when the last Prop 13 property assessment Republican voter dies. Because that will be a few more decades.
@Tfourier, re-introducing the idea of a fair and (dare I use the word) “equitable” property tax would, imo, put California Republicans back in the game from a public policy messaging standpoint. It would likely generate a national debate on tax reform in general. For example, “high-end” property owners in Tibouron would pay more as a percentage of property value than low-end homeowners in XYZ with a FLAT tax; albeit, with the kinds of adjustments for fixed income seniors and financially challenged that you discuss. The focus of public concern would then be concentrated on how the money is SPENT by state and local authorities. I like your idea. This is the kind of “out-of-the box thinking” that California Republicans need to start doing. What do they have to lose? Not much, according to Mr. Ring’s election results data.
https://rethority.com/states-with-no-property-tax/#Property_Tax_Rates_by_State
That is way more than I can ever have said about prop 13. We need you to report to the CA GOP tactical ops center (real estate battalion) ASAP!
Look at the CA GOP website. It looks like a green energy non-profit. I emailed them about it…crickets. No call to action above the fold other than “DONATE”, nothing to get excited about. It seems that the CA GOP is run by boomers who do not even realize everyone else at the country club is a Democrat. Really, for the time being, they are content doing whatever the Market Cap between SF and Jan Jose permits them to do. It reminds me of the battle right now between TPUSA and Ronna McDaniel. Did Ronna show up at all the UCs and take the heat from Antifa? Nope. Instead, she lashes out at Charlie Kirk. Does the CA GOP even oppose “gender-affirming” surgeries beyond a few words here and there….or are they just on the take from the same Lupron manufacturers, the AMA, APA, defense contractors, Big Tech…etc. Where is the CA GOP? Outnumbered for sure, but it is like they do not exist except for that pathetic website.
I agree with this. It was also utterly painful moving because I lost my old tax rate, and I needed to move to step up into a better neighborhood. Prop 13 has caused total stagnation and I see what you see….a bunch of boomers in a home worth well over a million bucks. Many of them with only one boomer left, not even any kids still there. I have been wondering what will happen as 75% of them exit Planet Earth over the next 10 years. Do they even have any kids to pass it on to or did they not reproduce per Paul Ehrlich’s panicked predictions? The state is a train wreck. It helps to remind myself that my dad had it much worse. He had the misfortune of being born in Berlin in 1928. Talk about state power indoctrination! Then he spent his “high school” shooting down bombers over Berlin and then the actual “Battle of Berlin”, occupation, commies, and so forth so on. He liked California but he said that we all suffered from a “blissful ignorance”.