Steve Hilton’s Case for Governor—and the Debate Becerra Skipped

Here’s my take on California’s governor race: Steve Hilton is the better choice if you want Sacramento to treat the cost of living like an emergency, not a permanent feature of California life. His pitch is specific enough to argue with: eliminate state income taxes for people earning $150,000 or less, lower energy costs, cap certain homebuilding fees and make room for much more housing. I’d rather hear a candidate put bold numbers and plans on the table than offer another reassuring speech about affordability.

That is an endorsement of his priorities, not a claim that the math is settled. Hilton says cuts to high-speed rail, state agencies and Medicaid fraud would save about $25 billion a year. I want to see that calculation tested hard. I also want answers about where his proposed new cities would get water, roads and jobs—and what his push for more oil production would mean for climate policy. Becerra has a housing agenda of his own: faster permits, down-payment help and restrictions on investor competition with homebuyers. Voters deserve to compare those approaches, not pretend only one candidate has a plan.

Now, about Becerra supposedly hiding from debates: that goes too far. He and Hilton debated on CNN on September 30. Becerra did not attend the later Los Angeles Times–LAist event, but he had never agreed to that proposed debate. His spokesperson said his campaign declined because its schedule was full; LAist reported that his team did not answer a follow-up offering another date. We do not know his private motive. My opinion? For a candidate with a reported double-digit polling lead, limiting further encounters may be politically comfortable—but it is lousy for voters. One debate is not a lifetime supply of scrutiny. Put both candidates back onstage, press Hilton on the price tag, press Becerra on his record, and let Californians hear the answers side by side.