Social Issues

More than any other policy area, social issues have polarized Texas and California and the camps they represent. These topics provide fodder for the nation’s culture wars. Many such issues are framed in the language of rights and are difficult to resolve through normal political give-and-take. After briefly discussing the range of social issues that divide the two states, the chapter narrows its focus to three: abortion, guns, and LGBT rights. Texas and California have polarized on these topics and, to the extent permitted by federal law, have translated their opposing views into sharply contrasting policies. The states’ discretion on these topics has been limited, however, by Supreme Court interpretations of federal constitutional rights. The chapter concludes by discussing the alternatives for addressing social issues that divide the nation along ideological and sectional lines, comparing the options of uniformity and pluralism.

Energy and Environment

This chapter examines the deep Texas-California divide over energy and environmental policies. The modern Texas economy was built on energy, and the state remains the nation’s leading producer. The state’s development of fracking has revolutionized the oil and gas industry and has helped the nation break its dependence on foreign oil. Texas has also increased its production of renewable energy, but believes the global economy will rely for the foreseeable future on fossil fuels and resists restrictions on these resources. California, by contrast, has become a global leader in the fight against climate change. It has aggressively regulated carbon emissions and mandated a massive switch to renewable energy sources. California is the only state that can impose emissions regulations more strict than federal standards. As power has shifted in Washington, California has alternated between translating its environmental policies into federal law and defending its policies from federal challenge.

Taxes

This chapter places Texas and California on the national spectrum of state tax policy and shows how they occupy opposite poles. Texas has maintained a low overall tax burden and is one of a small number of states that has steadfastly refused to adopt an income tax. Advocates of the Texas tax system argue that it protects personal freedom, promotes economic growth, and provides the state a crucial advantage in attracting new residents and businesses. Critics say the system is regressive and fails to produce adequate funding for government programs. By comparison, California has embraced a far higher tax burden and a progressive tax structure. Its largest revenue source, the personal income tax, is the highest in the nation. Advocates say California’s tax system generates needed funding for government programs and appropriately shifts the tax burden to those most able to pay, while critics say these taxes are excessive and help drive residents and businesses out of the state.

How Texas Turned Red

This chapter explains how Texas came to align with the Republican Party. Texas is now the essential Republican state, but for most of its history it was part of the solid Democratic South. In the mid-twentieth century, the Texas Democratic Party divided into liberal and conservative factions—partly over race and civil rights but also over a range of questions including New Deal economic policies and anti-communism. Texas Democrats engaged in what V. O. Key called the most intense intraparty fight of any state in the South. The long-dormant state Republican Party began to revive in the 1960s as many Texans became alienated from a national Democratic Party that was shifting to the left. Republican gains produced a period of balanced two-party competition that lasted from the 1970s through the 1990s. By the early 2000s, the GOP established dominance, making Texas the nation’s largest and most powerful Republican state.

Origins

This chapter argues that the polarization of Texas and California can be traced to their origins. The chapter examines the two states’ common experiences as possessions of Spain and Mexico; their mid-nineteenth century American settlement, conquest, and admission as states; and their opposite positions on the questions of slavery and secession. Although the two origin stories have similarities, they also bear crucial differences. Texas’s bloody independence struggle and its decade-long career as an independent nation were different from California’s experience as a remote maritime province inundated by a global gold rush and its rapid admission to the Union. Most critically, Texas was settled by American southerners and was oriented toward the South, while California was settled by migrants from across the nation and around the world and was oriented toward the North. These differences became imprinted in the states’ identities and helped shape their futures.

Labor

The Texas and California models have polarized over labor policy. Texas has been a national leader in promoting a free-market approach to the employer-employee relationship. Texans were early supporters of the “open shop” and advanced this policy by coining and promoting the term “right to work.” In addition, Texas has restricted public sector unionization and has dismissed most other elements of the labor agenda. By comparison, California is one of the nation’s most union-friendly states and the most assertive in regulating the workplace. California has been a leader in recognizing the right of groups to unionize and strike and in enacting workplace regulations that exceed federal minimums. For example, the state was among the first to adopt a $15 minimum wage. California also provides its public sector workers comparatively generous pay, pensions, and benefits. The chapter concludes by presenting basic trade-offs of the two models.

Economy

Economics helps explain why California and Texas have become powerful states—and also why they have polarized. Texas and California have built economies that align with their competing political and policy models. Texas has relied on an economic model based on bountiful energy resources, free-market policies, and low costs—cheap land, inexpensive labor, and low taxes. This model has allowed Texas to attract businesses and sustain growth. By comparison, California exploited its natural advantages to build a robust economy. In time, the state developed a comparatively high cost structure, which caused it to lose much of its manufacturing base. The state was saved, however, by the emergence of “knowledge industries,” including a powerful technology cluster centered in the Silicon Valley. These industries have been willing to pay a premium to operate in California and have generally supported the state’s progressive policies.

Sibling Rivals

This chapter introduces the Texas-California sibling rivalry. All states can be considered “siblings,” but the connections between Texas and California are especially strong. The ties include common origins as territories of Spain and Mexico, Sun Belt geography, rich natural resources, vibrant economies, large-scale immigration, and comparable demographics. Moreover, in the past, Texas and California agreed on a range of political questions. In the 1990s, however, the two states began to divide. In the years since, they have hardened their partisan identities and come to advocate more sharply opposing visions of government. More than other states, California and Texas have driven our contemporary national polarization. The chapter presents the book’s central questions: Why, despite their similarities, have Texas and California divided? How have these states translated their competing visions into policy? And what does the future hold for these models—both for these two states and for the nation as a whole?

Poverty

Poverty is a chronic problem in both Texas and California, as it is in the rest of the nation. This chapter analyzes the two states’ competing strategies for addressing it. The Texas Model provides comparatively low levels of direct government support for the poor. The choice is based in part on budget limitations, but more fundamentally on the conservative view that government welfare programs often fail to lift people out of poverty and can foster dependency. California takes a more progressive approach. The state believes that government has a responsibility to provide for those in need and has increased state spending on government programs to assist the poor, including Medicaid expansion, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), aid to the homeless, and more.

Rival Models

This chapter discusses how gaining one-party control of state government (also known as a “trifecta”) has allowed the governing coalitions in Texas and California to develop their contrasting policy models. The Texas Republican coalition includes business interests, libertarians, and social conservatives. These groups are unified in their commitment to small government, low taxes, and light regulations, but sometimes divide over social issues. In California, the governing Democratic coalition includes organized labor, environmentalists, social progressives, and advocates of minority rights. This coalition broadly agrees on the state’s fusion of progressive economic, social, and environmental goals, but sometimes disagrees on how to manage trade-offs between them. The chapter compares these coalitions’ effectiveness in shaping state policy and describes how both states have intensified their efforts to influence federal policy, especially through federal litigation.