A Santa Barbara–based think tank is hoping to turn up the heat on California’s discussion of public employee compensation in a series of debates with a libertarian slant. Oddly enough, the first stop is in Santa Cruz.
A Santa Barbara–based think tank is hoping to turn up the heat on California’s discussion of public employee compensation in a series of debates with a libertarian slant. Oddly enough, the first stop is in Santa Cruz.
The California Center for Public Policy will be holding the Great Debate at the Museum of Art and History on Tuesday, Mar. 13, and organizers have invited former Mayor Mike Rotkin to argue the opposing side in favor of public employees.
Rotkin says he loves to talk public employee compensation. The vice president of organizing for the UC–American Federation of Teachers—who says he’s relatively unfamiliar with the think tank, which was founded in 2010—isn’t surprised by the group’s conservative slant or worried by it. “That was my impression: anti-government, anti-tax,” Rotkin says. “I’ll go anywhere to debate this question.”
The debate will be moderated by former Assemblymember Joe Nation, a Democrat from the North Bay who co-wrote a commentary for the Sacramento Bee last week titled “Pension Costs are Crushing Local Governments.”
CCPP president Lanny Ebenstein says the group hopes to get a discussion moving. “We hope that people will learn more about—not just about their own opinions—but also opinions from the other side,” says Ebenstein, who will be arguing that public pensions are too high.
The debate will be the first in a series of some seven debates statewide, with others set for Berkeley, Los Angeles and San Diego.
Almost all of the CCPP’s 14 board members are Libertarian or Republican, and most hail from Santa Barbara and neighboring counties. Ebenstein says they are currently expanding their operation, though, and hope to open a Northern California office soon.
Ebenstein thinks liberals should be receptive to his message. Right now, he notes, California is gridlocked in a debate over whether to either increase taxes or cut public services. He thinks that dynamic should change. “We believe it should be viewed as fair compensation or reduced government services,” Ebenstein says.
Rotkin expects the event to draw a conservative crowd. “That’s all right,” Rotkin says. “I enjoy talking to conservatives.” Rotkin thinks many Democrats and activists wrap themselves in a liberal bubble so tight they forget to listen to the opposing side’s ideas. More importantly, they forget how to have a discussion.
“Some people on the left don’t know how to make their argument,” Rotkin says. “They say that something’s wrong or racist. How is it racist? It is possible to turn [these problems] around. We shouldn’t assume that everyone who’s conservative can’t be turned around on their ideas.”
