SACRAMENTO — It’s easy to become cynical about the state of California’s democracy, especially as we await an interminably long vote-counting process that is slower than one might find in any given third-world country. The process is the punishment, as candidates and voters are forced to follow every new batch of ballot-counting for the coming days and weeks.
Mail-in voting is a great advancement, but there’s no conceivable reason for ballot deadlines to be so expansive that registrars of voters must wait a week after Election Day to tally ballots that were mailed at the last minute — and a process that doesn’t certify the June 2 results until July 10. This undermines faith in the system and energizes our conspiracy-minded fellow citizens who don’t understand why new vote batches lean in one direction or the other (blue or red mirages).
But my cynicism this week stems also from another frustration: the preponderance of low-information voters, even in an online world where election information is at everyone’s fingertips. There’s little value in putting work into voting given that no individual vote could affect any outcome. No offense to voters who do their homework, but their votes are cancelled out by people who just check off a box based on party or the sound of the candidate’s name.
I have no dog in the election hunt, as I dislike both major parties and, as a cynic, always assume the worst-possible human being will rise to the top. As Benjamin Franklin said, “In rivers and bad governments the lightest things swim at top.” What else would explain a national election pitting Donald Trump against Kamala Harris, who are two of the worst people I’ve ever seen in public life? Even when I like a candidate, I don’t get vested in his or her success. I’ve accepted that we now live in a kakistocracy.
But let’s focus today on one particular election, that of state insurance commissioner. In a sane world, the insurance czar ought to be an appointed position selected by the governor based on that person’s understanding of the complex insurance market. Thanks to our direct democracy, voters in 1988 approved Proposition 103. It made the slot an elected one — and also implemented a “prior approval” system that gave the commissioner the power to set insurance rates.
It should be news to nobody that California has plumbed the depths of a property-insurance crisis that has seen major insurers pull back their underwriting or leave the state altogether — thus leading to shortages, higher prices and a state-backed insurer of last resort (the FAIR Plan) that’s teetering on insolvency. These editorial pages have repeatedly gone into the details, but suffice it to say that the best person for the job would be someone who understands insurance complexities.
One of those candidates, Democrat Patrick Wolff, seemed like the clear choice. He has a deep background in insurance, has done voluminous research on the market’s current challenges and has delved into the intricacies of the rate-review process. Several major newspapers spanning the ideological spectrum endorsed him for that reason. “He’s clearly the person one would pick if the job were about qualifications, not politics,” this newspaper group opined.
He raised a sufficient amount of money, produced a great advertisement, attended all the requisite debates and events, and ran a textbook campaign with a compelling, poll-tested theme: Vote for the guy who knows how to fix insurance rather than a leftist who wants a government-run system or a former legislator with minimal insurance experience who is looking for a place to land.
Sure enough, based on the latest incomplete counting, California voters have selected the leftist who wants a government-run system and a former legislator with minimal insurance experience who is looking for a place to land. To depress you further, consider the latest vote counts. Wolff has 7% of the vote. Republican Robert Howell has 8.7%.
When he ran against current Commissioner Ricardo Lara in the 2022 general election, this Editorial Board explained that Howell is “the owner of a technology equipment manufacturing firm in the San Jose area who said he made the decision to run for insurance commissioner because he was ‘looking around for a place to throw my hat in the ring,’ and it looked like a good opportunity. He said he knows little about insurance and would rely on others to tell him what needs to be done, and then he would expect the department’s employees to do it.”
So the best-qualified candidate didn’t come close to making the runoff, and also is losing to someone who is basically just a name on the ballot. Next week, I’ll review the collapse of the only true reform candidate in the governor’s race, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan. Don’t worry. It won’t be old news, as the state will still have weeks left of ballot-counting.
Steven Greenhut is a member of the Southern California News Group editorial board. Write to him at stevengreenhut@gmail.com.