The debate last night between California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was billed as a contrast in approaches in how red states and blue states are governed. It was meant to showcase the different underlying philosophies in state governance and make a case for each one to the American people. That would have been an interesting 90 minutes of television.
Red and blue states have obviously distinct approaches to a wide variety of issues such as taxes, crime and education — all of which Fox News moderator Sean Hannity tried to cover, while the two governors talked over each other, resorted to personal attacks, pulled out their best soundbites and continually turned the conversation back to the 2024 election.
In a political environment where elected leaders always seem to be looking toward the horizon for a higher, better office, it may be impossible for politicians to stick to talking about the local domain they have been entrusted to govern. DeSantis accused his rival of trying to “California-ize” the nation and Newsom was directly asked by Hannity at one point “why are you talking about Biden? I thought this was state vs. state?”
Polling from the State Policy Network, where I am a fellow, shows that three-quarters of Americans believe the most meaningful change happens at the local level. Instead of keeping the focus on positive, local-level change in their respective states, Newsom and DeSantis couldn’t help themselves from bashing contrasting approaches and telling people in other states what they should want.
That attitude ignores the ingenious design of America’s government. Individual states were meant to have policies that differed from their neighbors in order to avoid the bitter, divisive stalemate we find ourselves in now, as both parties attempt to federalize their preferred policies. Indeed, two-thirds of voters agree that each state ought to be able to make its own laws that reflect the different values, priorities and needs of their citizens. This approach allows local citizens to enact laws that best suit their needs without having to get permission from people thousands of miles away who lives in different economic, social and cultural conditions. This is the very core of self-governance.
The DeSantis-Newsom debate was a missed opportunity to broaden understanding among the American people ahead of what will be a contentious 2024 campaign. Conservatives might have been able to hear why blue state leaders believe higher taxes benefit society at large. Liberals could have come to better understand the concerns and goals red states had in pulling back from pandemic restrictions sooner. Instead, both governors talked around questions and presented facts while sticking, sometimes awkwardly, to prepared talking points and stories.
A broadening of understanding may or may not have changed anyone’s mind about individual policies or even larger governing approaches. But it clearly would stand a better chance of being successful than having two governors shout over each other to insult the collective choices of millions of Americans on the opposite side of the country.
It would be understandable if the governors used the platform to brag about their state and even attempt to draw more people to it — we want our state leaders to be proud of where they live. Instead, Newsom and DeSantis came across as saying that their way was the only right and good way to govern. This attitude does not inspire confidence in leaders, who at any level of government must bring factions of people together to make progress.
Our system was designed so people across the nation could “live and let live,” and at its core still does that well. Our leaders must stop trying to push America away from that model.
Erin Norman is the Lee Family Fellow and Senior Messaging Strategist at State Policy Network.