Endorsement: Our recommendations for insurance commissioner, superintendent of public instruction, controller

The editorial board operates independently from the U-T newsroom but holds itself to similar ethical standards. We base our editorials and endorsements on reporting, interviews and rigorous debate, and strive for accuracy, fairness and civility in our section. Disagree? Let us know.

In California, having one party at the wheel for so long has not meant full speed ahead on every issue. Despite Democratic supermajorities in both chambers of the state Legislature and a Democratic stranglehold on the eight state constitutional offices, Sacramento has increasingly been spinning its wheels on pressing matters like wildfire prevention, our high cost of living (only starting with the price of housing) and needed reforms to public education. The student achievement gap has only grown during the COVID-19 pandemic, and many students, teachers and school employees continue to struggle.

The state of California is in the middle of an era in which it can be said that things are going both very well and very badly. On the economy, state revenue is flooding in and unemployment is declining. The state budget surplus is nearly $100 billion. And instead of putting a permanent crimp in the Golden State’s stride, the pandemic has underscored its strengths in Silicon Valley and its technological expertise in numerous advanced fields. The Republican arguments that high taxes and heavy regulation are going to kill the golden goose are still being made. But where’s the proof?

Nevertheless, there is a critique of California that is powerful and daunting — and made by partisan conservatives, apolitical people and the yakkers in your book club alike: The cost of living is so extreme that poverty among middle-income households is pervasive. Homelessness is more entrenched than ever. Housing costs are soaring despite years of efforts to reduce them. Everyone has family or neighbors or co-workers or all three who left for states they felt offered more promising lives.

It is with that in mind that The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board offers three June 7 election endorsements for state constitutional offices that could benefit from a shake-up. Earlier this week, we endorsed four constitutional office incumbents — for secretary of state, treasurer, lieutenant governor and governor, each clearly the most qualified candidate in their races — but lamented the fact that none had a serious challenger to foster a clash of ideas and faster progress on pressing issues. Given that violent crime is spiking and criminal justice reform is so important, we will devote a separate editorial to the election for attorney general. Now, in races for insurance commissioner and superintendent of public instruction, we are strongly recommending voters replace the incumbents, and in the race for controller, we are recommending a Republican who won’t let party allegiances get in the way of having to check lawmakers’ power.

For insurance commissioner, we endorse San Rafael Assemblymember Marc Levine over fellow Democrat Ricardo Lara, the incumbent. Lara is likely to be one of two candidates to make the Nov. 8 runoff election, but he shouldn’t be re-elected. He doesn’t deserve a new term. Scandal has dogged him from his days in the Legislature, and he’s only become more synonymous with it while serving in a role requiring ethical stewardship to ensure insurance companies treat all Californians fairly. That role gets trickier all the time with the climate emergency meaning more wildfires threatening homes.

Levine vows to be an “activist insurance commissioner who will stand up against the insurance companies on behalf of Californians to ensure that everyone has access to better, more comprehensive insurance options.” And he says he’ll require insurance companies to provide discounts and incentives for risk mitigation and home hardening programs. Meanwhile, as Levine notes, Lara took campaign contributions from the insurance industry even though he pledged not to. Lara counters that he returned those. But Lara has also repeatedly overruled his administrative law judges in favor of his donors. He’s got to go. We believe it’s time for new leadership — ethical leadership — in that office.

For superintendent of public instruction, we endorse two totally different candidates over incumbent Tony Thurmond. We think Californians would benefit from a runoff between teacher and South Bay Union School District board President Marco Amaral, who is pushing for higher teacher salaries, and education policy executive Lance Christensen, who is critical of teachers unions. We as a board have long called for education reforms involving things like teacher tenure and better metrics for teacher and student success. We also believe teachers have one of the most crucial jobs in the country and are underpaid. Months of more debate between Amaral and Christensen would be healthy for Californians and the public education system. They couldn’t be more different, and we don’t agree with either entirely. In a Q&A, Amaral impressed us with his cogent criticism of Thurmond, his advocacy for students with disabilities and his desire to overhaul the state’s school funding formula. The points Christensen made in his interview likewise resonated with us, starting with his belief Thurmond abdicated his duties during the pandemic and his intention to center parents in decision-making should he assume the office. We have additional questions for both: Has Amaral fully thought through the budget implications of higher across-the-board teacher salaries? How does Christensen view individual parts of the state’s ethnic studies curriculum framework? More time for this debate leading up to the Nov. 8 runoff election would be welcome.

But it’s clear to us that Thurmond couldn’t have been more ineffective than he was during the pandemic. His position, which oversees 2,700 employees at the state Department of Education, doesn’t come with any legislative powers, but it carries great responsibility and a soapbox for urging action. Yet when schools were closed and students were struggling with online learning and later readjusting to in-person education, Thurmond was nowhere to be found. He doesn’t see it this way, but his leadership was nonexistent. Also last year, Politico reported Thurmond’s work environment was toxic and his office had high turnover. We believe it’s time for new leadership — any leadership — in that office.

That leaves the election for state controller, a surprisingly competitive one. While we have bemoaned the lack of qualified challengers in other state races, the field in this one is impressive. But one candidate stands above the rest. In our view, Republican fiscal adviser/educator Lanhee Chen is the best fit to replace termed-out Betty Yee as the person who cuts checks for state government and conducts independent audits of how state agencies spend money. Chen has four degrees from Harvard University and has served in Democratic and Republican presidential administrations. In his thoughtful interview with us, he pledged aggressive audits of state spending and an ambitious timeline to upgrade the state’s outdated payroll system.

Chen’s competition is four strong Democrats — Orinda state Sen. Steve Glazer, city of Los Angeles Controller Ron Galperin, California state Board of Equalization Chair Malia Cohen and chief financial officer Yvonne Yiu. Glazer especially impressed us with specificity and messaging on modernization.

But Chen made his case: “The fundamental problem we’ve had in California is that our elected controllers have largely been part of the one-party political establishment in Sacramento. My approach would be different.” Voters should give him the shot.

Editorials

2022 election endorsements from The San Diego Union-Tribune

These are the candidates we recommend on the June 7 primary ballot for national, state and local races.

May 17, 2022