Possibly.... But let's not fool ourselves: the financial crisis of California was/is caused by much more than simply illegal immigration (although that certainly plays a major role). California has a HUGE state government workforce with outrageous salaries, benefits, and pensions. This is because the CA Legislature and Governor have pandered to the state workers unions in exchange for political influence and campaign contributions. California has a grotesque workman's compensation system. California has social handouts that are magnets not just for illegals, but also for hordes of worthless bums who migrate here from other states to cash in. California has punitive and oppressive tax and regulatory systems that drive businesses out of state. California has an education system that is so top-heavy with overpaid bureaucratic administrators, that even if we discharged all the illegals, it would still cost us a fortune to run. The point of pointing this out is that it is not just illegal immigration running the late great state of California into the ground: it is unchecked Leftism. And it's coming to a state near you. Sure, flyover country is predominantly conservative. But flyover country doesn't have the political might and/or will (at this time) to overturn the race towards national socialism. Frankly, it doesn't matter how conservative flyover country is as long as the federal government continues to move Left (and I'm talking about BOTH political parties).
John writes:
"Please respond to these questions directly, and maybe I'll believe your arguments have weight."
I already responded that. In many ways, it doesn't really matter what the new governor's position is on illegal immigration. Border control and immigration control are not within the state government's purview. Let's assume that we could elect a governor who will take a hard-line stance against illegal immigration. What could he do? He couldn't put troops on the border. He couldn't round up and deport illegals (that's the job of the INS...or whatever they're calling themselves these days). He couldn't even enact legislation to cut off social services to illegals (assuming he could get such legislation past the communists and socialists in the CA Legislature) because some Leftist judge(s) would simply overturn it (the same way they blocked the voter-approved Prop 187).
So my point is that the salvation to California, in regards to the problems of illegal immigration, rests not within the California government, but rather in the will of the American people as a whole putting pressure on our national government to end this problem.
But for a more direct response, I agree with you that it will be very difficult for any new governor to turn California around, primarily because we will first have to also recall 99% of the CA Legislature. One of the reasons Gray Davis and the legislature are trying to push through (before the recall) this bill giving driver's licenses to illegals is specifically so that more illegals aliens will become illegal voters--to keep the Leftist Demoncrats in power, of course.
John writes:
"there will arise (shades of "Reconquista!") a cultural sentiment that California should again become a part of Mexico. ... We will almost certainly see the rise of a "separatist" movement a la the Party Quebecois. ... Prediction: the citizens of the 'other 49' may just decide to relinquish the California territories."
I have a prediction for you: if California does fall under Mexican control, there is no way in hell they would want to secede. Why would they want to throw away the golden goose (i.e., the rest of America and the socialist federal government that will be confiscating YOUR tax dollars and redistributing it to the "Bronze State")?
Sure there will always be an undercurrent of reunification with Mexico by radical activists, but they will be a small minority compared to those that would rather continue sucking at the teat of Aunt Sam (i.e., Uncle Sam after the feminists emasculated him and the homosexual lobby forced a sex-change operation). And with California's political clout, you wouldn't be able to boot the state away if you wanted to.
John writes:
"One thing I can state: the illegal invasion is most certainly "unstoppable" in California, far past critical mass at this point. How can it ever be contained (which would not solve the problem) or reversed (which might)? I challenge you to refute this."
I'm not willing to surrender just yet. But it will take a NATIONAL effort to reverse the downward spiral. This is not just California's problem: it is AMERICA's problem. If the remaining states do not want to follow California's lead (and they will follow our lead--whether they want to or not--if things don't change in Washington), then all must act to stop this invasion by force of our country.
John writes:
"California cannot be saved."
Allow me to paraphrase Pastor Martin Niemöller:
First they came for California
and I did not speak out
because I did not live in California.
Then they came for Arizona
and I did not speak out
because I did not live in Arizona.
Then they came for New Mexico
and I did not speak out
because I did not live in New Mexico.
Then they came for Texas
and I did not speak out
because I did not live in Texas.
Then they came for my state
and there were not enough electoral votes
to speak out for me.
John writes:
"But there is still time remaining to 'build the cultural wall' necessary to contain much of the rest of the land."
Don't think that you can throw California to the wolves to keep them at bay. The wall we must be building, is not between California and the rest of America, it needs to be between America and her neighboring countries. And it will take all the states UNITED (now there's a concept!) to do it.
Then you're admitting that illegal immigration _cannot_ be stopped, no matter who wins the California governor's election. If that is the case, California's social course insofar as the illegal invasion is concerned cannot be changed. It will continue, and get worse. It doesn't really matter _who_ is "to blame". It is going to happen.
SpyGuy also writes
I agree with you that it will be very difficult for any new governor to turn California around, primarily because we will first have to also recall 99% of the CA Legislature. One of the reasons Gray Davis and the legislature are trying to push through (before the recall) this bill giving driver's licenses to illegals is specifically so that more illegals aliens will become illegal voters--to keep the Leftist Demoncrats in power, of course.
Then you're admitting that California's course _cannot_ be stopped, no matter who wins the California governor's election. OK, you _said_ "very difficult", as if you're trying to hedge that you, too, see what is inevitable. I understand the bill to grant driving licenses to illegals _has_ passed the legislature as of tonight. How will this make a turnaround any _less_ difficult?
SpyGuy continues:
I'm not willing to surrender just yet. But it will take a NATIONAL effort to reverse the downward spiral. This is not just California's problem: it is AMERICA's problem
I'll grant you that. But -- right now -- the problem is festering to the greatest degree in California. If Californians are unable -- or unwilling (I sense the latter) -- to take proactive steps to solve their numerous crises on their own, do not expect the rest of America to solve these troubles _for_ them, unless the citizens of that California (I sense you are one) are willing to give up some of their "state sovereignty" as well (read on).
Even though you're not "willing to surrender just yet", the fact that you're even _mentioning_ "surrender" indicates to me that you see it as being a real possibility, bearing down hard and fast.
In responding to my posts, you keep trying to transfer the blame for California's problems towards the federal government, and by implication, towards the "other 49" states. "We didn't create this mess, YOU did!". "We can't solve it, YOU can!" Very democratic of you to put things that way (hearty laugh). And since there is no possibility for Californians (of all political persuasions) to dig their own way out of their self-created hole, they -- INCLUDING the Republicans -- will soon be screaming bloody murder for _us_ (meaning: any American who is NOT in California) to "do something" - to make "NATIONAL effort to reverse the downward spiral".
No deal. I'm not buying that, nor will the majority of the rest of America. If America has to take steps to "save California", the most prudent step will be to exercise some "tough love" and fiscal discipline towards the fallen (ne "golden"?) state.
I'm not sure how this could be done. I'm thinking back to the New York City fiscal crises of the Beame era, where an entity was created that wrested some control of the city's finances away from the city itself. I would predict that any "nationally imposed" solution to the California bankruptcy will be some sort of financial board that takes control of the state's finances out of the hands of California's legislators and places it into the hands of a blue-ribbon commission of some sort (selected by financial experts and politicians of _other_ states). Nothing more than a half-baked prediction. But you read this here first, right on Free Republic.
Would such a solution be unacceptable to Californians? Fine -- then save yourselves. But if you want _our_ tax money to pay for _your_ problems, expect _us_ to demand - and to exercise - control over how our money is spent.
SpyGuy concludes:
Don't think that you can throw California to the wolves to keep them at bay. The wall we must be building, is not between California and the rest of America, it needs to be between America and her neighboring countries. And it will take all the states UNITED (now there's a concept!) to do it.
Do you recall the story in the news, not too long ago, about the lone hiker (in Utah, or was it Colorado?) who, trapped in the mountains by a huge falling rock, cut off his own arm to free himself? How could someone have summoned the intestinal fortitude to do something as unthinkable and drastic to save himself? An amazing story, almost unbelievable. But he did it -- TO SURVIVE. What would have been his alternative?
If California continues to the point where it threatens to drain the lifeblood from the rest of the nation, could Americans [collectively] take such drastic action to save the bulk of their nation?
Is such a thought as equally unthinkable?
Cheers!
- John