How low can California Democrats go? It seems they are going to continue to push the limits of that question.
California Democrats, who have enjoyed a super majority in the legislature for decades, have been lulled into a sense of invincibility and a feeling that no policy position, no matter how bad it is won’t hurt them.
Two bills that tested the limits of that invincibility were SB1414 and most recently AB379.
Both dealt with an issue that on its face should be a no brainer for politicians, should we punish those who purchase or traffic minors for prostitution?
I haven’t seen an official poll on this question, but I imagine the results would be pretty lopsided in favor of “Yes, we should punish them severely,” and for any small percentage that doesn’t agree, it might be wise to check their hard drives.
This issue first came into the national spotlight with Senate Bill 1414, introduced by Republican State Senator Shannon Grove. Senator Grove also introduced a prior bill, Senate Bill 14 in 2023, which would make it a felony for those engaged in child sex trafficking.
You read that right, a bill to make child sex trafficking a felony in California because it wasn’t before.
California Democrats worked to kill that bill too.
Both these bills were opposed by Senate Democrats, for a multitude of deplorable reasons. One of the most vile reasons came from Democratic State Senator Nancy Skinner (from Berkeley no less) where she defended her opposition by saying; “Selling sex has been within human cultures for millennia. It is a very difficult area of law to get into.”
Very difficult? What’s difficult about making sure we protect minors from being victims of sex trafficking? This seems to be one area of law that is pretty black and white.
Despite all of this hand-wringing by Senate Democrats, both SB 14 and SB1414 were signed into law by Governor Newsom. Newsom took a specific interest in these bills once he saw the negative national press California was getting around them, but because of the negative blowback on his inevitable 2028 Presidential run.
Most recently, AB379, was a bill introduced by Democrat Assemblywoman Maggy Krell. This bill seeks to make it a felony when purchasing minors for sex. Again, not something that should be so controversial, but this is California after all.
When it came up in committee, committee members suggested amendments that would remove 16-17 year olds from being an automatic felony charge. Instead they would be treated as “wobblers” by District Attorneys, meaning the District Attorney could request someone be charged with a felony or a misdemeanor.
Once again the story made it to the national spotlight, and after much drama, Assembly Democrats backed down, and bill passed out of the Assembly without the amendment.
This would now be the third time California Democrats balked at bills that should be easy, bipartisan slam dunks. Yet they threw up all the usual smokescreens of objection.
Assemblymember Lashae Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego) argued, “History has shown these types of crimes are used against people of color and those experiencing poverty. When laws are vague, they are ripe for profiling. I am worried about Black, Brown and the LGBTQIA plus community being overly policed and targeted.”
We’ve heard rationale like this on every issue from crime to climate change, but it doesn’t really fly here.
Black, Brown, LGBTIA, whatever group you cite, these bills are about protecting minors. Hard stop.
Are Assemblymembers like Sharp-Collins arguing we shouldn’t protect minors of those communities?
In a state that is dominated by Democratic politicians, it seems the absolute power has gone to their head. They don’t seem to think their radical positions will have negative blowback. Instead, they are handing up easy political wins for a California GOP that is starved for any traction.
But is it really that California Democrats don’t think these policy positions will hurt them, or is it that they believe, because of their electoral domination, voters actually agree with their policies?
The latter might be scarier of the two. One is based on the arrogance gained from electoral domination and no effective opposition party. The other is based on the dogmatic belief that their positions got them to this domination, and thus they should continue to push them.
It has been easy going for California Democrats for the past two decades. No opposition, total domination. Election victories are piling up. No stress of running against someone who might steal your seat. That type of entrenchment is empowering to politicians. It is no wonder they don’t think they will face negative blowback from any positions.
These past couple of years have shown the limit of that arrogance. AB379 was authored by Democrats, and they were opposed by the powers that be. Do these moderates begin to break away from the progressive orthodoxy in Sacramento? Does the progressive wing of the California Democratic Party slowly ebb into irrelevance because of outlandish positions?
Time will tell, but handing political win after political win to your opponents will have an effect at the polls. Republicans are already using AB379 to run attack ads in vulnerable districts. A seat here, a seat there, super majority lost, and you will be able to pinpoint the exact moment the California Democrats began to lose influence and control.
To answer the question, “How low can California Democrats go?” I doubt we’ve seen the bottom. The bottom might get even more terrifying and shocking to California voters.
Until then, every new low they hit results in political consequences. I’m just not sure what goes lower than not wanting to protect minors from sex trafficking.