If anyone momentarily forgets what a treasure we have in Voice of OC, Norberto Santana’s article today on the SD-37 special election should remind them with overwhelming force. It is the best mainstream article that we’ve seen on this race — mandatory reading for those who will go to the polls tomorrow. It’s journalism the way you (hopefully) remember it.
Invoking the purpose of criticism, I will quote from it more extensively than I usually would, simply because Norberto has identified the differences between the candidates (and the rents in both the Republican and Democratic parties) better than any other media figure has done. He’s also gotten the best quotes. I disagree with some minor points in a few places — where I think that he’s focused on the label without looking at the ingredients — as I’ll point out below. But that’s the sort of close engagement that a really well-written and well-researched article allows.
Norberto’s writing is in blockquotes:
[T]he race between state Assemblyman Don Wagner and former County Supervisor John Moorlach features the latest in a series of intensifying election clashes between moderate, pro big-business factions and more fiscally conservative, libertarian-leaning wings of the OC GOP.
“Pro-big-business versus fiscally conservative,” yes. But “moderate vs. libertarian-leaning,” I think, misses the point. I don’t mind “libertarian” being applied to Moorlach’s camp, but that’s a overweening categorial term to apply to essentially one thing: Moorlach opposes government economic intervention that is driven by its benefits to big contributors and agents. I don’t even know that Moorlach is opposed to government economic intervention that isn’t driven by the benefits that it can provides to big contributors and agents; do people actually propose such things here in Orange County? I suspect that where the public is well-served and big donors and middlemen are not snarfing up the lion’s share of the benefits, his criticisms, if they existed at all, would be relatively muted.
Moorlach’s position here is the polar opposite of Wagner’s: it is THE primary issue dividing them. Wagner routinely favors government economic intervention that is driven by its benefits to big contributors and agents. That’s why he has all those humongous contributions and independent expenditures on his side. One can apply many terms to this, some of which (“practical,” “pragmatic”) are value neutral and some of which (“self-serving,” “complicit in ripoffs”) are not. But I see no basis whatsoever to call them “moderate.” In fact, time and again, these projects are anything but moderate. But to get ahead in politics, one must usually — and Moorlach is an exception here — “go along to get along.” That’s what Wagner does. Wagner is conventional while Moorlach is unconventional. And Wagner seems to truly believe that there’s nothing wrong with clubby conventionality turning into complicity. In fact, he’s outraged by Moorlach’s outrage over it!
[Wagner] criticizes the former CPA – credited with pointing out the 1994 Orange County bankruptcy – for running “a scurrilous, negative campaign based on the principle that ‘everybody is wrong except me, John Moorlach.’ ”
“That’s how he has conducted his public career,” Wagner said. “You either agree with John or you are stupid, and bad and a sellout.”
That may be the most heartfelt-seeming quote I’ve ever heard from Wagner. HOW DARE Moorlach criticize him for going along with someone else’s scheme to get rich(er) via “public-private partnerships”? Everyone in Wagner’s circle of close colleagues does it, after all! It’s like blaming a individual for looking the other way when a sexual assault is taking place at a frat party! (One can imagine Wagner as a fratboy, in college years ago, facing criticism after word of “men going too far” leaked out: “We’re all adults here (except for maybe that girl passed out in the corner), we’re not going to change the culture, so we just have to go along with it! What the hell is his problem? Why is he singling people out when everyone’s doing the same thing? This is the real world here!“)
Yes, Moorlach thinks that Wagner is a “sellout” — the “bad” and the “stupid” and the “wrong” all derive from that. If Wagner thinks that the term is defamatory, he should remember that the truth is a defense against defamation. Wagner may not feel like a sellout, but that’s because after enough times perhaps one hardly notices it anymore. It’s not “selling out” to him; it’s just how things are.
Just like last November’s mayoral election in Anaheim – where Mayor Tom Tait stood in stark contrast to an array of business interests like Disney and District Attorney Tony Rackauckas – Moorlach finds himself standing up against just about every member of Orange County’s political establishment.
Wagner slams Moorlach, 59, as an ideologue who can’t work with others and sees nearly every public policy initiative through the lens of an accountant who concludes that virtually all government is a boondoggle.
It’s bizarre to argue that Moorlach “can’t work with others”; I’ve seen him work excellently with others, including our Vern Nelson, on projects like blocking the Toll Lanes on the 405. What Wagner defines as “working well with others” seems to be focused through the lens of “can’t work well with others to promote government economic intervention that is driven by its benefits to big contributors and agents.” That, to Wagner, is what legislators DO — and Moorlach would only get in the way and gum up the works!
Yes, indeed. Moorlach would be a brake on the bipartisan locomotive designed to get tax money into the hands of thieves like Poseidon and knaves like the middlemen and politicians (Steve Sheldon, Brett Barbre, many more) who would profit from it. As one person, he would not be much of a brake. But that train needs brakes! Even when Moorlach is wrong — as he was on the Veteran’s cemetery in Irvine — he’s speaking as an unconvinced accountant. But — as Wagner seems not to realize — accountants can be convinced by facts and rational arguments.
Wagner, 54, sees himself as a sensible conservative that can work with business and unions and others with the aim of crafting broad-based policy.
“I can vote no without voting ‘hell no’ or poking you in the eye,” said Wagner, a former school board member and Irvine resident who has served two terms in the state Assembly.
Wagner is pursuing no real ideology, when it comes to scamming money from the public without delivering equal (let alone greater) value, except for doing what doesn’t get him excluded from the club, and what also just happens to stuff his campaign coffers to the gills. Of course he never feels the need to poke anyone in the eye over such things — he’s not voting no if he’s told not to do so, and he has no applicable values to aggrieve.
Does that make him “sensible”? Not at all. He’s only as “sensible” as the policies he ends up promoting — and those tend to be ripoffs of the public. He’s “sensible” in terms of acting the way he has to act to be a member of the club and getting ahead — which may be why he’s now getting so frenzied at seeing Moorlach standing in his way — but being that sort of “sensible” politician does not equate to being a sensible policymaker.
Moorlach – who has indeed always kept a fairly independent profile since taking over the treasurer-tax collector’s office after the county bankruptcy – sums up the mountain of endorsements arrayed against him simply.
“Crony capitalism,” said Moorlach, taking aim at much of Orange County’s political establishment.
Orange County Republican candidates like Moorlach – independent, libertarian-minded ideologues – much like Tait before him and Supervisor Shawn Nelson before both of them, are increasingly running against establishment interests.
“Crony capitalism” — a term applicable everywhere from post-Soviet Russia to Mussolini’s “corporatist” Italy — is the right term here, and there are few phrases that “establishment” politicians like hearing less.
Norberto mentions that Tom Tait and Shawn Nelson, Moorlach’s prime endorsements, are “largely opposed to business subsidies and the rising costs of public sector pensions.” I don’t have great relations with Nelson, although (with the possible emerging exception of Lisa Bartlett) he is my favorite among the Supervisors, but I have respect for his streaks of non-self-serving pragmatism.
I have talked a lot to Tait, though, and my impression is that Tait wears the same green eyeshades as do CPAs like Moorlach. He’s opposed to business subsidies that don’t create greater value for the public. If he’s opposed to most of those presented in OC, it’s because most of those presented in OC — at least when you look at them closely — don’t pass that test. And while he is intent of not letting the cost of pension drag down state and local government, he’s not opposed to working class and middle class people being able to retire with a decent negotiated pension, although he might argue them down just as his opponents in negotiations would argue them up. That’s normal negotiation. He’s opposed to what he sees as bloated pensions for those in the upper ranks of public employees, who have massive influence over the course of negotiations and often can negotiate their own pension. There, when the funneling of public money into private hands starts to look more like unfair capitalization on opportunities, is where the CPA types think that stronger opposition is required.
This pair of quotes is lovely and telling:
Moorlach argues that special interests have little impact on him because he hasn’t had to cut any deals with them to get into office.
“It is very difficult and very intimidating,” to go up against the Orange County Business Council and their interests, Moorlach said. “But it’s also rewarding that I’m running a campaign funded by individuals…friends are stepping up. I have no PAC (political action committee) money. I have no union money. I’m an independent, free spirit. That’s comforting. Win, lose or draw, I’m not in anyone’s pocket. And that’s what frustrates the crowd I’m up against. A lot of these electeds are concerned about being in elective office. I’m concerned about doing elective office.”
On this front, Wagner is the exact opposite.
“All of the folks that I’m working with up in Sacramento are backing me and all of the folks that John is working with in Orange County are backing me,” Wagner said. “That tells you something.”
Wagner’s right: it tells you that Wagner is the candidate of political insiders who are happy with the mechanisms by which public money gets shunted to them, and Moorlach is the candidate of outsiders who don’t abide pilfering from the commonweal just because it comes at the behest of people in expensive suits.
Skipping ahead, because there’s just so much good stuff in Norberto’s article.
Moorlach counters that he started paying into it just when other managers agreed to do so.
The two men are likely to bring a very different game to Sacramento.
Moorlach said he’s sharpening his accountant’s pencil.
“I want to dig. I want to play with numbers. Work with the state auditor. Follow up on reports. Do my own analysis,” Moorlach said, noting that he’s worried about a mountain of debt affecting the state and is unafraid to sound alarm bells.
Wagner said that kind of approach shows why Moorlach won’t be successful in Sacramento on behalf of his constituents.
“He has no idea how it works up there,” Wagner said. “We have tons of accountants up here.”
Isn’t that lovely — and telling? “We have tons of accountants here,” says Wagner, so don’t bother doing your own analysis. Just digest what you’re fed. One wonders if Wagner accepts the reports from lawyers — are there megatons of those in his and my profession up there? — with the same blithe acceptance. I can see one really good reason to want an independent CPA in government — because he might find things that would give even a Don Wagner pause. Wagner never will; Wagner will not even try to look. He’d be a passive, reliable vote in the State Senate — doing exactly as he is told and raking in the rewards.
Wagner’s argument to self-serving Orange Countians is that he won’t deliver for his constituents. Well, one hates to point this out, but neither did Mimi Walters, and she was as clubby as they come. If a Moorlach in the state legislature helps to strip the waste going to the other 52 counties in the state, then there will be more money to go around for good purposes in all 53 of them. And OC will get its share — even if Moorlach himself doesn’t vote for it. We’ll get more, I’d say, then we would if the Don Wagners of the world send so much of that public money to the wealthy (where a little of it trickles down to their employees and to union members) rather than for the public generally.
I can’t and won’t endorse Moorlach for Tuesday; I disagree with him on too many other issues. But on those issues I generally disagree with Wagner as well — and this is the major issue on which whoever is elected is more likely to make a difference. I’d like to see Louise Stewardson get as many votes as she can and I’d like to see Naz Namazi get a bunch of votes as the de facto “none of the above” option for conservatives and Republicans who aren’t yet convinced. But if I rank them #1 and #2 tomorrow, then Moorlach — much more so now, after the ads and the donor reports, than when the campaign started — is ranked #3. And #4 is — if you can’t vote for one of the above, don’t vote at all. There is no #5. OC has more than enough politicians like Don Wagner in politics already; we don’t need to elevate one more.
Moorlach’s final (and irreverent) pitch:
One thing that I do have to credit him with: good sense of humor.
[Author’s note: Mudge corrected two typos, now fixed. Thanks, Mudge!]
A lot of people don’t like Moorlach because of the annoying sanctimony in which he cloaks himself. Unfortunately (for him) this makes him think he is above fund raising.
Speaking of overweening, that would be his own self-appraisal. I’ve never seen anybody so satisfied with so little. Moorlach is completely average intellectually. Sitting next to Janet Nguyen or Pat Bates makes anyone appear stellar – for a while. The man finds it very, very difficult to embrace new concepts; or, if he does he hides his mental flexibility very well.
Alas, Moorlach accomplished virtually nothing substantial in his eight years on the BoS. At least I can’t think of anything. He sponsored (through complete inaction) the total moral collapse of the Mauk era that reached a crescendo with the Bustamante cover up and subsequent arrest. He contributed campaign funds for Mauk’s going away party, thinking to do otherwise wouldn’t be “good form” – an exact quotation.
I still can’t believe Wagner didn’t go after him for that stuff, plus the millions wasted on mismanaged IT disasters.
Wagner? Yes those Voice quotes are a brutally painful revelation of a very tiny mind and a vanishing moral compass. He appears to be a perfect little junior member of OCs Smash ‘N Grab Club. Anybody who would support the duplicitous Lucille Kring for future favors from PringleCorp deserves defeat ASAP.
And here’s the very best reason to keep Wagner right where he is: his loss would rid us (for a while at least) of the ultimate sack of slime – HAIRBAG SIDHU.
“Even when Moorlach is wrong — as he was on the Veteran’s cemetery in Irvine — he’s speaking as an unconvinced accountant.”
Sorry Greg, I cannot agree with you on that. Moorlach got it right on his call for an amended bill for the Veteran’s Cemetery at the Great Park.
https://johnmoorlach.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/moorlach-update-youre-being-political-april-9-2014/
He tells us himself: “I made a very simple request to amend AB 1453, change it to “Support, if Amended.” Instead of giving our Orange County Veterans a pipe dream, let’s actually build, fund, and operate a Veterans Cemetery. Here was my proposal:”
I will summarize, Amendments 1 and 2 trade County money being withheld by Sacramento for County money Sacramento wants us to put into the Vet Cemetery. That is fair. More than fair.
Amendment 3 was something that the Vets themselves had requested before Wangner and Quirk-Silva hijacked a very real cause and tweaked it for their own campaign fodder. Those of us involved in the issue will recall that the Orange County Cemetery District was already discussing with the Veterans’ group, and had come to an informal agreement, that we would be happy to run the cemetery for the Veterans, either for a fee (provided by Veterans’ benefits from the Feds) or in exchange for a portion of land to help meet the future needs of Orange County’s non-Veteran populations, as the Cemetery District needs to obtain more land at some point. Now full disclosure, I serve on the Board of Trustees for the OCCD, but I am speaking only for myself here, merely offering insight as someone who had been involved in those discussions as a first person witness. Quirk-Silva’s staff grabbed the issue, which everyone was initially grateful for, but they injected generic wording from a different cemetery, promising this was only a place keeper and would be amended to meet the needs of the veterans group and what they had been seeking to accomplish. Then suddenly, WITHOUT the promised AMENDMENT, this was put to a vote and done.
The Cemetery District was the best hope the Veterans had for getting that dream accomplished, because as Moorlach’s Amendments 1 and 2 point out, the State has no money, while the OCCD has a decades long track record of running a very professional and efficient operation with a balanced budget and the financial means to make that acquisition and development work for all involved.
Had Moorlach’s amendments been put into place, which would have brought the Quirk-Silva/Wagner bill into alignment with what the Veterans ASKED Sharon and her staff for, I believe we would be working on that cemetery today instead of trapped in the mire of Sacramento delta mud that is certain to hold up the development until long after those who had worked so hard for it have been buried at Riverside for lack of a site in Orange County.
Quirk-Silva and Wagner hijacked a worthy issue for their own political grandstanding, and in doing so they killed the issue as effectively as if they had simply not carried the bill at all. Offering the patient the wrong medication is often worse than no medication at all, because he believes something is being done for him.
I shall reply to you after the polls close! (Or, if there’s a post office open somewhere until midnight where people might still be able to mail their absentees, then tomorrow.)
P.S. Did Wagner actually do anything on that bill? I had thought that he was merely decorative.
Focus, David; election’s today. So, if I understand you correctly, you agree with my ranking of (1) Stewardson, (2) Namazi, (3) Moorlach, and (4) not voting?
I would vote for the cute Persian chick.
Close enough!
There’s nothing “moderate” about Don Wagner. That’s another word that gets thrown around and has lost any meaning, like conservative and liberal.
He was totally willing to hate on Mexican immigrants when that was the cool thing for California Republicans to do. I lampooned him when he gave his “encrosion” speech at a 2010 Tea Party on that topic. http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2010/07/verns-report-from-the-tea-party/ How is that moderate?
What he is, is unprincipled.
No, he has a principle: shameless pursuit of self-interest.
Oh, Vern. That “moderate” versus “ideologue” stuff is lazy, cooked-up narrative horse crap. They are all ideologues on any given day.
As I interpret it, Vern thinks that “insider” vs. “outsider” is a better way to categorize politicians. It’s a useful additional dimension, as this race shows, but it’s still a subordinate one. Moorlach still has a lot more common with Wagner than he does with Elizabeth Warren.
Still, insiders often cling together in bipartisan clumps — and increasingly, especially in odd niche environments like OC, so can outsiders.
I think that you are giving short shift to the shameless pursuit of self interest
and with that fundamental purpose in mind, I am proud to say that I have voted three times for wagner today and will do the same in a couple of months when my good friend mr sidhu will be on the ballot
but, unofficially, I do like the way the cute persian girl carries herself
*Mr. Sidhu has a track record of being a three time loser. Nothing encourgages
us to think that demographic will change. We will support Christina Shea first.