Are you sold on Meg Whitman as a governor? Me neither. The state needs big change, and her campaign has offered stale plans and over-the-top political attacks.
There’s not much hope in Meg.
But one must have high hopes for Meg’s money.
Yes, the billionaire candidate has spent north of $100 million. But there’s much, much more where that came from. And so, while Meg doesn’t inspire me, her money does.
Let’s say that a Gov. Whitman wins election to office. She’ll discover sooner or later – hopefully sooner – that her plans aren’t worth much. She’ll find that the legislature doesn’t care much what she thinks. She’ll find that in California’s thoroughly broken system, a governor is little more than a janitor, helping clean up the constitutional messes that previous voters and lawmakers have made.
And when she reaches that breaking point, she’ll be sitting on a pile of money.
Achieving the kind of systemic reform California needs – new election systems, an unwinding of its mess of supermajorities and spending mandates, and a smarter initiative process that fits with other institutions – will require a ton of money to achieve. Money to organize institutions and campaigns for major reform (through a constitutional convention or a revision body). Money to draft plans. And money to change public opinion so Californians understood how their system got broken and how they might fix it.
Right now, efforts at systemic reform are underfunded. But if a frustrated Gov. Whitman were to decided that it was in her and her state’s best interests to tackle big reforms, her money could fuel the movement.
Jerry Brown, who also has run a campaign short on specifics and any real reform plan, could get religion too. But he wouldn’t have the resources to pursue reform. Meg would – if she saw the light.
Yes, this isn’t a stirring or inspiring argument. But in a contest between two candidates this weak, the best case for Meg rests on her purchasing power.