Home / Archive / Public Service Stalwart
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Department: February 2006
Public Service Stalwart
Dave Cox examines eminent domain, stadium funding and legislative myopia
Story by Rich Ehisen
Dave Cox has been a noteworthy fixture on the Sacramento political scene for more than a decade. After six years as a member of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, Cox was elected to the Assembly in 1998.
Always a strong pro-business advocate, he has earned numerous awards for his public service and was named Outstanding Legislator of 2003 by the California Building Industry Association.
He was elected to the Senate in 2004 to represent District 1, which stretches all the way from the Oregon border south to Mammoth Lakes, encompassing more than 850,000 residents. We spoke with him recently to get his views on life in the Legislature after last November’s special election and the resulting fallout for the Sacramento region’s business community.
Comstock’s: A lot of people feel the Legislature is a dysfunctional organization. Given the results of last November’s special election, most observers feel this current session will be more dysfunctional than ever. Do you see anything good at all coming out of the special election?
Cox: I do believe that the governor today probably better understands how he can resolve issues with the majority party than he did in November. I think he understands now that he has to work with the Legislature to get things done. It’s not just about going to the people and saying, ‘I want to do this’ or ‘I want to do that.’
He needs to work with the Legislature first, and then if he can’t get it done he can make the decision about taking it to the people. But I think you also have to remember that 2006 is another election year. From that standpoint, I don’t expect our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to cut him much slack.
Comstock’s: There seemed to be a window of opportunity after the 2003 recall to end some of the partisan bickering that happens here. That seems to have gone away now. What can be done to get it back?
Cox: Well, the real question is whether there really was that window. In my view, there are two different philosophies here [in the Legislature]. One party thinks our budget issues are a revenue problem; my side of the aisle thinks it is a spending problem.
People want to see us compromise, but based on my experience in Sacramento, compromise means I move from my position toward their position. Rarely, if ever, do my colleagues on the other side of the aisle come in my direction.
Part of that has to do with the imbalance we have in representation. Democrats have a 48-to-32 edge on Republicans in the Assembly and a 25-to-15 advantage in the Senate. When the side with 48 gets tired of talking, they vote. Historically, 48 always beats 32.
Comstock’s: Did the special election squander what opportunity there was to achieve greater cooperation between the parties?
Cox: Squander is too harsh of a word, but it is a situation in which the governor would have been better served if he had not had so many initiatives. He went wide and probably wasn’t deep enough.
There is a philosophical aspect to this as well. The governor managed to amalgamate four organizations — police, firefighters, nurses and teachers — that had never before been amalgamated. They all previously had their own interests, but the special election managed to amalgamate all four of them into one entity whose only objective was to defeat Governor Schwarzenegger’s objectives. Would he have been better off not to have done that? The answer is yes.
Comstock’s: Let’s switch gears. Eminent domain has also been a major issue over the last year. After the Supreme Court decision last year, many state legislatures acted quickly to more narrowly codify how and when eminent domain can be used. You’ve been actively involved with eminent domain issues around the Conaway Ranch situation here. Do you anticipate any such changes here in California?
Cox: I was hopeful about a proposal [State Constitutional Amendment 15] from Senator Tom McClintock last session, but it didn’t make it out of committee. My guess is that anything which does make it out of committee this year will be significantly watered down because many of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle don’t see it the same way we do.
Eminent domain used to be used to create roads, bridges and schools, but now it is seen as a tool to increase tax revenue by taking property and giving it to somebody else. I still support Mr. McClintock’s efforts at a constitutional amendment, but my guess is that the only way he’ll get that done is through the initiative process.
Comstock’s: As we all know, the cost of professional sports stadiums has gone through the roof, so much so that several states in recent years — Texas, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Louisiana, to name a few — have either already committed or are seriously considering committing public money to help build stadiums or arenas for professional sports franchises. Given the situation in Sacramento with the Kings and their desire to replace Arco Arena, can you envision the Legislature here using public money in this way?
Cox: Certainly not if it requires my vote. I don’t believe that the public sector ought to be building facilities for private entities. It is a fact that when you get yourself into that situation, there is no way to ever get yourself out.
Comstock’s: What will be the biggest issues facing lawmakers in the new session?
Cox: The budget is still the No. 1 issue, just as it has been for the last six years. We still have a structural deficit where we annually spend more than we take in. But we also still have far too many people in the Legislature who don’t understand the function of business.
For all intents and purposes, we have a very anti-business environment here. Do these people not understand the importance of creating jobs? Do they not understand that a good job is the No. 1 factor in having a good quality of life?
This issue is one we have to work at every single day of every single year because my guess is that today, right now, at least one major company in this state is getting calls from folks in other states who are telling them, ‘Hey, if you bring your jobs here, this is what we’ll do for you.’
Many of those jobs can also be done in Spain or Italy or Costa Rica, and it isn’t much different than being in Folsom, except it is a lot cheaper to do business. I do think the California business climate is in some ways on the incline, but we’re still a state that is overregulated, overlitigated and overtaxed.
Comstock’s: In your view, will it then take a major company like Intel leaving this state for that environment to change?
Cox: We just saw one study that says we’re not really losing that many jobs, but the truth is that we have a growing population. We need to be very concerned about jobs coming into California. Intel just expanded in New Mexico, but they won’t expand here.
Why not California? Why do they go somewhere else? We need to know why that is and we need to create an environment in California where businesses that provide good jobs want to be here.
