Shocking exposes of waste, fraud, and abuse in state government have dominated media headlines in recent weeks.
Our friends Christopher Rufo and Kenneth Schrupp at the Manhattan Institute uncovered an unfinished wildlife “bridge to nowhere” in Agoura Hills, which has cost taxpayers over $100 million to date and counting. CBS News recently uncovered significant fraud in government-funded hospices operating in Los Angeles County.
What do these examples have in common? They were uncovered by think tanks, citizens groups, and the news media.
This begs the question – why isn’t state government making it a priority to identify and eliminate wasteful spending?
Unlike in Congress, where oversight hearings are the norm, state lawmakers don’t do much oversight work. While the State Auditor’s office and the Legislative Analyst’s office offer recommendations for improving government spending and ending inefficient or ineffective operations – often at the request of lawmakers – these ideas typically collect dust on a shelf.
However, there have been a few recent high-profile examples of oversight.
Remember the principled efforts of then-Senate Budget Committee Chair Holly Mitchell during the COVID-19 pandemic questioning Gov. Gavin Newsom’s controversial no-bid mask contract with BYD? She used oversight hearings to make clear that she wouldn’t give the administration another blank check for COVID spending.
Then there was a 2023 Assembly committee hearing on the Newsom administration’s ineffective homeless spending. Then-Asm. Laura Friedman said at the time, “it’s very frustrating for the general public when they hear that . . . we’re spending billions . . . of dollars on homelessness and housing, and yet they don’t feel they’re seeing enough of an impact in their communities.”
Unfortunately, none of these examples led to reform or program cancellations. The criticism uttered by lawmakers amounted to little more than sternly delivered comments.
For his part, Newsom has bragged about his efforts to use AI to improve government efficiency, which he calls “DOGE but better.”
But his efforts haven’t amounted to much in practice. As Politico recently reported, the consulting firm Newsom hired to find $2 billion in savings and efficiencies in corrections, social services and health care spending only found $810 million in savings – despite winning a $20 million state contract to conduct the effort.
So, why is state government oversight either on the backburner or being ineffectively carried out at the State Capitol?
Remember, every tax dollar spent wastefully or inefficiently is a dollar that doesn’t go to actually serving a population in need. If lawmakers want to serve the affected communities they claim to be advocating for, then isn’t it in their interest to ensure tax dollars are properly spent?
Some of the reason is politics. Public employee unions including SEIU and AFSCME represent the state workers doing the work. They don’t want anyone over their shoulders, and reject reform that may lead to layoffs or significant workplace changes.
Another reason is Sacramento’s big spending culture. Making lasting real change is extraordinarily difficult as every budget line item has an advocacy group ready to fight. They’re not interested in making things better, but only want to preserve – or ideally in their view grow – the status quo. That means protecting government spending and government jobs at all costs.
While it’s hard to reform, it’s easy to jeer from the sidelines. Remember Gov. Schwarzenegger’s efforts to “blow up the boxes”? Better known as the “California Performance Review,” the 2004 effort produced over 1,000 reform recommendations totaling over $32 billion in savings. But it never went anywhere because lawmakers wouldn’t consider changes that would reduce the number of state employees.
However, there may be some thawing in the legislature’s resistance to reform. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas is to be applauded for making “outcomes reviews” a priority of his speakership, creating new oversight committees and holding hearings on issues like rising energy prices.
“Gone are the days when laws can be signed and forgotten,” he says.
He’s right.
Taxpayers will be waiting to see if the Speaker’s effort is performative, or whether we will finally see a much-needed push toward efficiency, innovation, and reform in how public services are delivered in California.
Tim Anaya is the Pacific Research Institute’s vice president of marketing and communications, and co-author of The California Left Coast Survivor’s Guide.