When Prop 14 appeared on the 2008 ballot, I believed what the supporters told me.
Prop 14 would bring out moderate candidates and force them to compete for all votes.
I wanted to see Republicans have a chance to win in otherwise unwinnable districts. In very few cases, two Republicans were the candidates who competed for votes in one district.
But after six years of Prop 14, it has become one of the worst thing that could happen to the California Republican Party.
 |
| Bruce Bialosky |
In at least three major elections, I did not vote for a candidate at all, since I had to choose between two very left-wing Democrats.
This is not real representative democracy. This is not a qualified republican form of government at all.
Our elections are flowing south and turning Left. Fewer people are voting, since two Democrats are both equally poisonous or disappointing to prospective voters. All the premises on which Prop 14 was presented to us--have failed.
What a sham.
Bruce Bialosky provided key remarks about Prop 14:
Back in the early part of the last decade, people often asked me about
running for public office. Other than I could not afford it because I was
putting two kids through private school, I told them I could not run for any
office except a statewide position because as a Republican it would be a
hopeless cause and I don’t do hopeless political causes. Now because of the
genius and money of Charles Munger, Jr., I cannot even run statewide in
California with any hope of winning.
This is so sad. Republican prospective candidates are giving up, and even Republican voters are giving up. They see any bid for office, whether at the local or state level, as a lost cause and a waste of money.
Granted, no citizen or set of activists should look at a candidate as the final arbiter of his fate. They need to ensure any candidate that there is a strong base of support and a willing machine ready to help a candidate win.
Talk about a good idea gone bad -- if it was ever even a good idea.
What this process has done has virtually wiped out the Republican Party from
even having a chance to win statewide elections. A perfect example was the
recent U.S. Senate race in California.
I worked for Duf Sundheim to have the chance to duke it out with Kamala Harris, since she entertained the race as the presumptive front-runner. She already held a statewide office, and she racked up all the endorsements from the state Democratic Party on down.
Her closest challenger became Loretta Sanchez, who was a laughable simpleton. She routinely embarrassed herself on television.
Kamala Harris did not even have to campaign that hard to win.
California now has a legislature that is not only controlled by
Democrats; but, because they have super majorities in both the State Senate and
Assembly, Republicans are only showing up to Sacramento to collect their per
diem.
It's a cynical yet very accurate way of describing what has happened to the California Republican Party.
What's the point of running in a primary when there is no guarantee that any Republican will make it into the general election? It has been difficult enough to get people to run. Now candidates are thinking about switching their party affiliation or not even trying at all.
Bialosky then outlined the down-ticket decimation entering into the general election:
· Five of the 20 State Senate races had no Republican.
EEK!
· Thirteen of the 80 Assembly Races had no Republican
UGH!
· Seven of the 53 Congressional races in California had no Republican.
When does the hurting stop?!
And people wonder why Hillary Clinton won a higher margin of the vote (aside from allegations of voter fraud.)
In many districts, Republicans had little incentive to vote!
One can say that in those districts Republicans probably had no chance
in the general election. But the voters never actually got to hear an opposing
view to the existing power structure.
I like that Bialosky brings up this point. Republicans don't have a chance to build rapport with voters even during an election cycle, since no one runs in the race! Even the Republican is pretty much guaranteed to lose, at least there's a Republican who portray the brand.
It's hard for a weakened party to force Republican candidates to stop aside from one candidate. It just won't happen. Look at the Election 2016 US Senate race. There were over 30 candidates!
Then Bialosky points out that even though Democrats end up spending multiple times more money because of Dem. on Dem. clashes, the final outcome hurts everyone. The intra-party fighting doesn't help Republicans, who don't even show up on the ballot!
 |
| Charles Munger., Jr. |
The final point in his article cannot be overstated:
There are many factors that have led to Republicans having such a
dismal performance, including a mass migration from the state of Republicans to
what they perceive as more business friendly and sane places. But Munger’s
ill-thought out plan to make elected officials more moderate has been an
abysmal failure and given California a radical Leftist government.
What a sad irony indeed. Munger Jr. wanted to moderate as well as modernize the Republican Party.
What happened? His Prop 14 pet project failed, and has created one of the most left-wing, nigh communistic governments in the country.
It's time for repeal.
