California's Democratic primary has become a referendum on the party's ideological future. With the state's top two vote-getters advancing to November, the choice between establishment favorite Xavier Becerra and billionaire challenger Tom Steyer will determine whether America's largest state party continues its embrace of corporate-friendly liberalism or pivots toward genuine progressive reform.
Becerra, who served as California's attorney general and later as President Biden's health secretary, represents continuity with outgoing Governor Gavin Newsom. His track record suggests a cautious approach to economic policy that prioritizes keeping corporations happy over aggressive redistribution. When it comes to taxation, Becerra has expressed skepticism about raising taxes on businesses, citing the discredited theory of capital flight.
Steyer offers a starkly different vision. The hedge fund billionaire promises to tax corporations and the wealthy at higher rates, expand free education from pre-K through college, pursue single-payer healthcare, and directly confront private prison industries. His campaign positions him as an anomaly: a billionaire willing to dismantle the very power structures that enriched him.
The contrast extends beyond policy. Becerra has walked back his previous support for single-payer healthcare after meeting privately with the California Medical Association, which subsequently endorsed him. Steyer, meanwhile, has aligned himself with Bay Area Congressman Ro Khanna, who has campaigned alongside him on healthcare reform.
Corporate interests are mobilizing against Steyer with unprecedented force. In the weeks before the June primary, groups funded by the California Chamber of Commerce, the state Realtors association, Pacific Gas & Electric, and major corporations like Chevron and McDonald's have spent tens of millions attacking the billionaire candidate. One anti-Steyer super PAC, funded by real estate and utility interests, alone spent $32 million on advertising.
Behind the scenes, Newsom's political apparatus is quietly working to ensure Becerra's victory. Strategists close to the governor view a Becerra administration as preferable to one run by Steyer, who might use the governorship to build a national profile that could complicate Newsom's own 2028 presidential ambitions. Newsom's chief consulting firm is leading a pro-Becerra super PAC.
Steyer's willingness to challenge pro-Israel lobbying groups has also marked a departure from Democratic mainstream politics. He has publicly denounced the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and claimed that pro-Israel groups have spent $25 million attacking his campaign.
Progressive Democrats have largely coalesced around Steyer, particularly younger voters and former Bernie Sanders supporters who view the state party as fundamentally unresponsive to working-class concerns. They see Steyer's campaign as validation that their grievances about corporate dominance within Democratic structures are legitimate.
The outcome carries implications well beyond California. A Steyer victory could signal that even billionaire-backed insurgencies can overcome establishment resistance when they align with progressive demands. A Becerra win would reinforce the message that the Democratic party, despite control of California's legislature and governorship for 15 years, will continue prioritizing business stability over addressing the state's persistent poverty and inequality.
Author James Rodriguez: "This race reveals that California Democrats haven't settled their fundamental dispute about whether the party serves working families or protects corporate California."
Comments