California's March 5th primary is almost here. There's quite a lot on the ballot. We have not one, but two presidential primaries where your vote doesn't matter as the outcome is essentially predetermined. The primaries for California's House delegation may determine control of the nation's lower house. Many county parties are electing their central committees, which play an outsized role considering how few people vote in them (hint, hint).
But there's also the first Senate primary where the eventual victor is truly uncertain since Barbara Boxer was first elected in 1992. The race to replace the late Diane Feinstein1 has pulled in three big-name Democratic representatives into a rather contentious competition.
On the left2 is Barbara Lee, the only member of the US Congress to vote against the 2001 Afghanistan Invasion.
Towards the center, Adam Schiff, Representative for Hollywood and only the 26th person to be censured by The House for "falsehoods, misrepresentations, and abuses of sensitive information."3
And in between them, Katie Porter, swing district representative for LA's beach towns and Irvine, and Elizabeth Warren wannabe.
But what if the best candidate to vote for isn't any of the Democrats, but the leading Republican, former Dodgers and Padres first baseman, Steve Garvey?
Wait! Hold on! Substack didn't serve you something from the Bay Area New Conservatives by mistake. There is a genuine case to be made that True Blue Liberals should vote for a Republican in the March Senate primary.
To be clear, Steve Garvey wouldn't be a good senator, he shouldn't represent California, and this is not an endorsement of him. Even the most moderate Republicans are still going to support GOP policies like banning abortion, cutting taxes for the wealthy, and undermining democracy. Witness "moderate" Senator Susan Collins voting to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court and then acting scandalized when he voted to overturn Roe v. Wade despite it being obvious to everyone, their mother, her dog, and her dog's fleas that a Federalist Society judge would vote against abortion rights.
But this isn't an argument for electing Steve Garvey to the Senate. This is an argument for Steve Garvey making it to the general election.
See, the way California's elections work, at least for federal and state offices, is that we have a free-for-all Jungle Primary, followed by a two-candidate run-off in November that pits the top two vote-getters from the primary in a head-to-head contest. Since California is such a lopsidedly Democratic state, this often results in run-off elections that pit two Democrats against each other, such as in the 2016 and 2018 Senate elections, the 2018 Lieutenant Governor's election, and many State Assembly and Senate elections.
But what does California's electoral system have to do with why you, the person reading this, who presumably holds democratic-leaning liberal values, should vote for Steve Garvey?
Before getting to the case for voting for Steve Garvey, it's worth noting that in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter which Democrat gets to be California's junior senator. A Senator Schiff, Lee, or Porter would almost certainly vote as a mainstream Democrat, approving nominations made by Joe Biden or rejecting nominations made by Donald Trump, toeing the party line on key legislation, and mugging to the camera during hearings in ways that make you yearn for the days of closed-doors and smoke-filled rooms. There are minor differences between them, naturally. Schiff would probably be more amenable to Hollywood studio tax breaks and copyright policies. Porter's senate office would probably be another Elizabeth Warren-style career incubator for left-wing-but-not-quite-socialist political operatives. And Barbara Lee (age 77) would likely be hounded by concerns over her age in the same way her predecessor was. But on the macro level, you, personally, would not feel much difference between a Senator Adam Schiff or a Senator Barbara Lee4.
But tactically, there is a case to be made that a vote for Steve Garvey in the March primary would have beneficial knock-on effects in other elections. Essentially, if the lineup for the November election ends up being a Democrat and a Republican, everyone knows the Democrat will win. It will be an insignificant squib of a campaign that will be called by the major networks one femtosecond after the polls close at 8:00 PM PDT on November 5th. Consequently, the sole Democratic nominee in November will not need to do much fundraising or campaigning to win their spot in the Senate. Those donor resources and campaign staffing can instead be dedicated to helping House candidates in swing districts and pro-housing candidates in state or local elections. By contrast, a Dem v. Dem election in November would be a brutal, knock-down, drag-out affair that could siphon money and attention away from races where the party of the eventual winner is actually in doubt. Considering this, a vote for Steve Garvey for Senate may be the most important thing one can do to help Democrats flip the House and keep a supermajority in the state legislature.
Now it's worth noting that this line of logic is unproven and one can make a contrary argument for why a D v. D race would be strategically preferable. In the absence of a statewide Republican candidate and with the winner of California's electoral votes preordained, Republican turnout might be depressed to the degree that swing district Democrats could eke out wins that they'd struggle to achieve if Steve Garvey were able to turn out Republicans that might otherwise stay home.
Certainly, it would be interesting to dig into the data to see if down-ballot Democrats benefit or suffer when a statewide election lacks a Republican candidate.
As the polling stands today, Adam Schiff and Steve Garvey are the most likely candidates to get past the primary. But all the candidates in the race have made the same calculation outlined here and are attempting lateral campaign tactics to help them make it to November or win more easily. Schiff's campaign has spent millions on "attack" ads against Garvey in the hopes of galvanizing Republican support behind him so he gets to general and Schiff gets an easy win in November. Conversely, Katie Porter is making a gambit to split the Republican vote by boosting the profile of Eric Early, an also-ran Republican currently polling in the single digits, hopefully allowing her to edge out Garvey for second place and take the position as the most liberal candidate in November.
There's a certain cosmic irony in the fact that California's Jungle Primary system, which tries to streamline elections by collapsing multiple narrow party primaries into a single broader election, has led to the unintuitive situation where Democratic candidates are supporting Republicans to try to gain partisan advantage over other Democrats.
and also serve out the remaining 3 months of her unfinished term
or far-left, depending on your perspective
read: Impeaching Donald Trump
Unless you happen to be Adam Schiff or Barbara Lee. In which case, thanks for reading this article! Would you like to speak at one of our events?