“What I like about representing this district is that everyone is one degree of separation,” he told students Jan. 7 as he explained his nexus to the community, and relayed his start in politics at the age of 16.
Then asking them for “brutal honesty,” had each student suggest a single word to describe politics.
“A game,” said Piper Leddick.
“Confusing,” said Heather Voorhis.
“Monopoly,” said Aubrey Brooks.
“Compromising,” said Emilie Newton, whose mother made the arrangements for the visit.
To Emily Lucas’s “intense,” Williams asked “intense, like a guy I was dating? Or did you mean it in a good way?”
With a slight blush, and a chuckle from friends, Lucas agreed that she meant it in a bad way. In fact, as a class they agreed that nearly all of the chosen words were negative. So he asked students, why should anyone go into a job that is almost universally thought of in a negative light?
Perhaps, had the visit come after recent events in Arizona, he might have asked another question as well, but he hit in large part on why he was invited to the school. “I wanted them to take away that politics is something that is noble and is accessible to them,” said Brett Piersma, whose Advanced Placement Government and Politics course Williams was attending. “Das is just this ordinary guy, who grew up practically in the same neighborhood.”
Piersma says that the path to politics is as varied as his own approach to teaching, and that he thought it was “neat for students to see someone who was down to earth.”
“He’s so young,” Brooks leans over and whispers to this reporter. Then, to a fellow group of students afterward, she agrees. “He’s just this little Santa Barbara guy. He’s so refreshing, and a good speaker.”
Williams told the seniors a story about how he was working to get out the votes many years ago, and under pressure from a girlfriend, quit an hour early. The candidate he was working for lost by eight votes. A loss, he says, his district is still paying for. Confident that he could have encouraged eight or more people to vote had he stayed on and worked that last hour brought him to the realization that he, as an individual, had more impact than he thought. “Participation levels are very low here,” Williams says, because of a failure to understand “that each person who turns out makes a large, large difference.”
The class grew silent as they mulled over his point. Save one student’s “Wait, what?” they did not respond when Williams asked if they had gone over what the federal, state and local governments do.
Perhaps slightly embarrassed, Piersma instructed the class to answer with a resounding “yes.” This resulted in both the ‘yes’ he requested, but also a classwide laugh. But it’s where the light-hearted discussion ended, and the focus on the difficult budget prospects began.
Williams noted what current polls show are the top areas where Californians don’t want to see budget cuts. They happen to correspond almost exactly to the top spending categories: K-12 schools, health care, prisons, which for the first time came ahead of universities. As to prisons, he clarified that people want to see cuts, just not prisoners let out. However, that would be the only way to achieve any meaningful cuts.
Piersma said he previously had his class read an article on polling, and how American’s generally have unrealistic desires when it comes to what they want from their government. In short, they want all the things that government spends money on without them raising the money to do it.
Williams explained to the students that should the state cut 10% from the K-12 schools’ budgets, which he acknowledges would be devastating, and cut all contributions to universities plus let out a large percentage of the prison population, those cuts will still not be enough to cover the deficient of nearly $28.5 billion.
“Rather than making cuts, why don’t we just make what we do more efficient?” asked David Imani.
Williams agreed that cutting waste was a laudable goal, one he would work for, but that “unless there is waste, fraud and abuse that cover more than 40% of the system, we’re in trouble.” He reviewed for students in general terms what percentages each area of concern represents in the overall budget.
The discussion moved on to how revenues can be raised, and Williams pointed out that because of the initiative process, laws can be changed by anyone who works to get things on the ballot. Williams said he was expecting to see an all-cuts budget to be proposed by Gov. Jerry Brown, but did not know until he read it, if it was something he could vote for. He asked the students what they expected the governor to do.
“He can’t make it much worse,” commented Imani, generating a universal laugh.
But the joke was short-lived. Williams pointed out that of the three things the legislature can do – cut spending, raise taxes or borrow money – all will harm the economy. He said that “we have more college graduates in California than in any other place on earth,” which he sees as something likely to help pull the state out of recession.
“It’s going to be terrible. It’s going to be horrible,’” said Williams of the pending budget. He thinks Brown will give voters a chance to make it better by putting something on the ballot, and predicted a special election in May or June.
Parker Johnson asked about the welfare programs, and wanted to know to what extent Williams thought that the program was the government’s job, and to what extent the private sector should take on that responsibility. Williams does not think the private sector is in a position to eliminate the government’s role.
“Ironically, people tend to set up charities where there is a lot of money, because that is where they can raise the money,” he said, dismissing the idea that the government should only fund welfare in communities that could not afford to fund it themselves.
“You can punish Santa Barbara residents just because they have money,” he said.
When asked what California’s biggest source of income is, Williams pointed out that except for the oil states, which generate their income from those recourses, most states primarily depend on property tax for their income. This is not true, in California, which generates its income primarily from sales and income tax. That both are substantially down in a low economy was not lost on the students, who murmured concerns.
Williams noted that on the positive side, there are more volunteers from today’s student population than there has been in years. He encouraged them to all be part of that force, and turned them back to discussing the economy.
He went on to share some of the political retribution threats he received, should he vote to extend the unpopular vehicle licensing fees whose sunset date looms. While not giving his position, he noted those fees primarily fund law enforcement programs. Students were both curious and concerned about the threats, but Williams would not dwell on them.
“What the students didn’t get,” said Piersma after the visit “was a political education. I wanted them to hear about the nitty-gritty; attack ads, how you plan campaign strategy, all the hard stuff they don’t otherwise hear about.”
Instead, Williams went on to express his strong support for Proposition 13 as it applies to residential property. He says that when voters enacted that proposition its long-term impact on commercial property was not properly or fully explained. Business properties are generally owned by limited liability corporations. As a result, those properties effectively have a permanent cap on their property taxes. This is because as corporations they neither die nor trigger an increase when sold, as is true for residential properties.
This, he believes, places an unfair burden on individuals to fund the state purse rather than having corporations share in process. For this reason, he believes the Prop 13 question should be looked into, but only as it applies to these limited liability corporations or business properties.
Unlike the federal government that can simply print more money if it needs it, states must borrow when they find their purses empty. Williams says California has already borrowed the maximum amount it can at reasonable rates.
“Most people don’t prepare for the lows when the economy is up,” said Williams who acknowledges that with respect to this subject, it is “something I agree with the Republicans on.” Most of the students believed that after this long-sustained low in the economy that people have learned better, but Williams pointed out that history tells a different story.
“People have learned their lesson right, now. The question is, will they remember the next time the economy is good,” he says. He faces the same issue most politicians do: Do you vote how the majority of people want you to, or do you vote for what you believe is best for your constituents in the long run?
Piersma said after that he and his class have spent a lot of time discussing the delegate vs. trustee model. “Are our representatives there to do what is best for us, to make the wisest choices, and not necessarily what we want at this particular moment,” he said was the question the class previously spent a lot of time discussing.
The class was eager to pin Williams down on the issue; he said he looks to the long run. His focus is doing what is best for the state and his district, and not on re-election goals. “People want an economy based on a high level of skills. If we want that, we have to invest in the people who are going to provide it: You all, our universities and our K-12 schools. To me, that is what’s most important.
“What is temporarily popular now is not necessarily what is important in the long run. You have to think about the long-term needs of your constituents.”
The discussion ended with Piersma assigning chapters 10-11 for homework.
“That’s so unfair,” was the general outcry.
“Why do we always have so much homework,” grumbled Newton. “I absolutely intend to repeat the experience for my students as often and with as many opportunities as I can manage,” said Piersma. “I would certainly like to get the other side of the political spectrum though. I do hope that there isn’t a sense that my classroom is one where only one political side is promoted. I’m interested in debate.”
And as the class ended, some students filtered out, while others stayed back, engaging Piersma in deliberation of all the issues that had been presented.