Republish
Commentary: We’ll see whether this cornucopia of legislation makes life better
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.

Commentary: We’ll see whether this cornucopia of legislation makes life better
Share this:
Anthony Rendon, the speaker of the state Assembly, calls the first half of the Legislature’s biennial session, which ended last week, “the most productive and progressive legislative session in memory.”
He’s right, if one measures such things by the outpouring of potentially far-reaching measures, including an extension of the cap-and-trade program for reducing carbon emissions, a multibillion-dollar tax hike for transportation improvements and, at the last moment, a package of housing bills.
Rendon and other celebrants also cite legislation to expand social and education services and erect protections for undocumented immigrants as part of the state’s “resistance” to President Donald Trump and a Republican Congress. And, he pledges: “It may be tough to top this year, but I know we will be back in January eager to achieve other progressive victories.”
That could happen. Democrats hold supermajorities in both legislative houses, the party is drifting leftward – in part due to its disdain, or even hatred, for Trump – and Gov. Jerry Brown, who has been a moderating presence for the past seven years, is displaying his inner liberal now that he won’t face California’s voters again.
However, it’s one thing to pass seemingly sweeping legislation, and it’s quite another for that legislation to do what its enthusiastic advocates project. The massive failure of energy deregulation in 1996 and the devastating financial effects of expanding public employee pensions in 1999 should be cautionary examples.
Another example: Five years ago, Brown and legislators overhauled K-12 school finance, freeing up formerly restricted funds and pumping billions of extra dollars into the 6-million-pupil system to close the “achievement gap” between poor and “English-learner” students and their more advantaged classmates.
To date, however, there’s no evidence that the surge of money has actually narrowed the gap. Reform groups complain that it’s been diverted to other purposes, rather than spent on the “at-risk” students it was supposed to help. A massive examination by CALmatters.org catalogued its shortcomings, and just last week, the huge Los Angeles Unified School District settled a lawsuit alleging that it had misspent its extra money.
Given those and numerous other examples, one should take the current claims of “progressive victories” with the proverbial grain of salt.
Yes, we will tap motorists for another $5 billion a year to fix roads and other transportation systems. But let’s see if Caltrans, which hasn’t been performing well in recent years – the mangled San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge project, for example – actually does what advocates of the tax package promised. And we should keep in mind that virtually none of the money will be spent directly on congestion relief.
Yes, we will continue to clamp down on carbon emissions, but the financial cost will be heavy, with even higher fuel prices and utility rates, and could leave California vulnerable to an economic downturn.
Yes, the Legislature did pass what appears to be an impressive array of housing bills, including a new tax on real estate transactions to finance affordable housing, a $4 billion bond measure and other steps to encourage private and nonprofit investment by slicing through red rape. However, while the tax and bond measures are optimistically projected to finance 77,000 new units over five years, that’s just a sixth of the increased housing production California will need during that period, and no one knows whether the streamlining will have its intended effect.
And so it goes. History indicates that legislation with good intentions often fails to deliver—and sometimes backfires. We won’t know for years whether this year’s cornucopia of well-intended bills deserves celebration.
Dan WaltersOpinion Columnist
Dan Walters is one of most decorated and widely syndicated columnists in California history, authoring a column four times a week that offers his view and analysis of the state’s political, economic,... More by Dan Walters