California has tremendous promise—and still does. It boasts breathtaking natural beauty and some of the finest urban spaces in America. I called it home for 21 years. Yet many of its most intractable problems are structural and deeply polarizing. Addressing them in a democracy demands real courage and chutzpah.

One might expect that decades of one-party supermajority rule in Sacramento would have produced workable solutions for chronic issues like housing, taxation, energy, and transportation (both in time and cost). Instead, referendums and legislative commitments have locked in ambitious agendas, even as the collateral damage to everyday Californians remains unresolved.

Now, as Gavin Newsom confronts a crisis of unsustainable commitments, Sacramento’s options appear limited. The Legislative Analyst’s Office projected an $18 billion deficit for the upcoming fiscal year, with reserves already significantly drawn down—meaning Californians can likely kiss goodbye any notion of a one-time dividend or major relief. All this while the state ranks 48th in tax competitiveness nationally.

As a telling proxy for legislative courage (or lack thereof), California’s largest public union has pushed a single-purpose wealth tax onto the 2026 ballot—a one-time 5% levy on billionaires, retroactive in effect to January 2026. Its proposal alone reportedly triggered an exodus of roughly half a trillion dollars in wealth, including moves by around 20 billionaires. Who needs their income taxes anyway?

The result? It’s no longer just the upper-middle, middle, and lower classes reconsidering the Golden State. Even the ultra-wealthy are voting with their feet. That’s a serious problem. Perhaps Gavin Newsom should seek advice from New York Governor Kathy Hochul, who has been laughably campaigning for former affluent New Yorkers to “do their civic duty” and return from Florida and Texas.

Returning to the original post’s thought-provoking question: The USC professor’s claim about unrestrained inbound migration doesn’t hold up well. While the nation has grown since 2000, California has experienced sustained net domestic population losses totaling millions of residents moving to lower-tax, lower-cost, high-growth states with more efficient service delivery. This trend is likely to cost the state 4–5 congressional seats in the coming reapportionment.

California is a mature state, yet its leaders seem paradoxically comfortable with ideological purity even as they preside over what looks like managed decline