Posts

Mixed Results on Housing Initiatives

An LAist article on local and state ballot measures addressing housing and homelessness called on UCLA Luskin’s Michael Lens and Shane Phillips for perspective. The latest returns show that more than 56% of L.A. County voters supported Measure A, which increases sales taxes to fund homeless services and new affordable housing development. However, Measure H, the initiative that first established the tax back in 2017, drew 69% support, noted Phillips, a researcher with the UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies. The dip in support may signal fatigue with funding homelessness efforts through the ballot box. Lens, a professor of urban planning and public policy, weighed in on Proposition 5, the state initiative that would have made it easier to pass affordable housing bonds. Angelenos joined other Californians in voting Prop. 5 down, perhaps because they found the initiative confusing. “A lot of times the default, I think, goes to ‘no’ because you’re suspicious if you don’t fully understand something,” Lens said.


 

U.S. Governance Challenges Put Election Integrity at Risk, Report Finds

With two weeks to go until the U.S. presidential election, a new analysis highlights critical governance challenges that threaten the efficacy of the American political system.

“Declining democratic accountability means that the power of the American people’s voice will be diminished — both in terms of electoral voice and the power of social institutions to check elected officials once in office,” according to the report authored by researchers from the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs, the Los Angeles-based Berggruen Institute and the Hertie School in Berlin, Germany.

Based on data from the latest Berggruen Governance Index, the report finds that both democratic accountability and state capacity have sharply declined in the U.S. since 2015.

Particularly in key swing states such as North Carolina, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia, declines in democratic norms — including curtailment of voting rights in some instances — could lead to “critical consequences for electoral integrity,” the authors caution.

The report also notes that an “outsized role of money in politics” has been exacerbated by landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions that have removed limits on electoral spending and increasingly marginalized the voices of average citizens.

Regarding state capacity, the report finds a broad and steady erosion since 2000, occurring across the sectors of fiscal capacity, coordination capacity and delivery capacity. Weakened state capacity negatively affects the U.S. government’s ability to respond to crises or natural disasters. This can lead to popular anger and increasing frustration with government efficacy, the report says.

— Democracy News Alliance

Read the full story

Read the report


 

Gilens on the Role of Money in U.S. Elections

UCLA Luskin’s Martin Gilens was a guest on the UC Institute of Global Conflict and Cooperation’s “Talking Policy” podcast on the role of money in U.S. elections. Gilens, a professor of public policy, social welfare and political science, and the author of “Democracy in America? What Has Gone Wrong and What We Can Do About It,” addressed how Americans feel about the current political system. “People are just … very unhappy with the state of our politics. They think the parties would rather fight against each other than work together to address America’s problems,” Gilens said. “And frankly, they’re right about that.” Gilens said Americans are extremely disillusioned, which is not new. “Our policy has, in many dimensions — whether it’s regulation, taxation and so on — shifted in ways that are beneficial to business and to owners and to the rich, and harmful to the middle class and to the poor.”


 

Affordable Housing Aspirations and Hurdles

UCLA Luskin’s Michael Lens spoke to CalMatters about Vice President Kamala Harris’ pledge to build 3 million affordable homes in her first term if she is elected president — and how a similar campaign promise made by California Gov. Gavin Newsom has fared. Harris’ plan includes tax incentives, an “innovation fund” to finance construction, repurposing federal land for housing, streamlining the permitting process — “all of the stuff we talk about at dorky academic conferences,” said Lens, a professor of urban planning and public policy. But as Newsom found, transforming the housing market from the top is difficult, thanks to pricey land, high construction costs, onerous regulations and community resistance. California officials are pushing to clear regulatory hurdles, with modest impact so far but the promise of a faster pace of home construction in the future. “That’s a precursor to making a lot of these things work,” Lens said. “We have to make housing more allowable in more places.”


 

Gilens Book Honored for Its Enduring Influence

UCLA Luskin’s Martin Gilens has received the Aaron Wildavsky Enduring Contribution Award from the public policy section of the American Political Science Association (APSA). The award, given in recognition of scholarly work that has made a lasting impact on the field of public policy over the years, honors Gilens’ “Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy.” The 1999 book, which sheds light on myths and misconceptions about welfare policy, public opinion and the role of the media in both, has been “profoundly influential,” APSA organizers said. They cited the book’s “rigorous analysis and insightful arguments, which have significantly advanced our knowledge of the intersection between public perception, race and policy, shaping both academic discourse and practical policy considerations.” The prize was presented this month at APSA’s annual convention in Philadelphia. Gilens, a professor of public policy, political science and social welfare at UCLA, has published widely on political inequality, mass media, race, gender and welfare politics. He is author of “Affluence & Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America” and co-author of “Democracy in America?: What Has Gone Wrong and What We Can Do About It.”


 

A Closer Inspection of Trump’s Comments on Immigration

A Los Angeles Times article about Donald Trump’s statements about actions he would take if reelected asked UCLA Luskin’s Chris Zepeda-Millán to weigh in on the former president’s comments on immigration. Trump has said he will “seal the border” with a physical wall, “carry out the largest deportation operation in American history,” order the military to attack foreign drug cartels and do away with birthright citizenship. While there is debate about whether to take the candidate at his word or chalk up his comments to populist rhetoric, Trump’s recent comments are his way of “doubling down on getting the most racist white Americans out to vote,” said Zepeda-Millán, associate professor of public policy and co-author of “Walls, Cages, and Family Separation: Race and Immigration Policy in the Trump Era.” Zepeda-Millán’s research shows that most Americans did not support Trump’s first-term immigration policies, and those who did held the “most racist views,” including general discomfort with growing Latino populations.


 

Experts Say U.S. Labor Force Needs More Foreign-Born Workers, not Fewer

In an article about the growing demand for foreign-born workers in the United States, Yahoo Finance spoke about immigration policy with Amada Armenta, associate professor of urban planning and faculty director of the Latino Policy and Politics Institute at UCLA. Noting that former President Donald Trump has vowed to finish a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, the story cites the GOP platform’s promise of the “largest deportation operation in American history.” Experts say such rhetoric misrepresents the country’s current and future employment needs, particularly with a large group of U.S. workers entering retirement. “Good policy can improve the politics around this issue, which has been really mired in dysfunction for decades,” Armenta said. “So, what we need are some courageous leaders who will change the narrative about the importance of immigrants in the United States and do their job to create legal opportunities for people who have been working here for decades.”


 

Yaroslavsky on Tamping Down Political Violence

Zev Yaroslavsky, director of the Los Angeles Initiative at UCLA Luskin, commented on a KCAL News/CBS News Los Angeles broadcast about the latest instance of political violence — the attempted assassination of former U.S. President Donald Trump at a recent Pennsylvania political rally. The former Los Angeles city councilman and county supervisor was asked how current politicians can ease tensions and tone down potentially dangerous political rhetoric. “I think mostly for the foreseeable future in the short term … the tension should be tamped down and the rhetoric will be less provocative, on all sides of the political spectrum,” he said, “… both because it’s the right thing to do and it’s also the politically correct thing to do.” Yaroslavsky said that people expect leaders, “from the top and all the way down the chain,” to bring unity and to try to bring people back together to stop the rhetoric that provokes political violence. “Words matter,” he said.


 

Understanding Europe’s Political Turmoil

News organizations covering political upheaval in Europe have turned to the 2024 Berggruen Governance Index (BGI) for a deeper understanding of nations’ capacity to meet the needs of their people. PA Media cited the index’s finding that “long-term scars” caused by austerity and Brexit have stifled economic growth and undermined social cohesion in Britain. The public’s level of trust in many government institutions is at near-record lows, according to the BGI, a collaboration between the Los Angeles-based Berggruen Institute and the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. In France, the researchers found that “sluggish economic performance, persistent inequalities and tensions around migration” fueled a surge in support for the political right, according to the Democracy News Alliance. That said, the index still ranks the quality of governance in Britain and France among the highest of the 145 countries assessed.