Republicans and Democrats don’t agree on much these days. But they do agree that “affordability” is the biggest issue in the electorate, and solving it may determine the winners and losers of the upcoming election.
That is where the agreement ends.
The solutions for dealing with affordability could not be any different.
For proof, look at the proposals coming from deep-blue California and Texas, which is still a red state despite the wishes of the New York Times.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott recently unveiled his six-point plan to increase affordability in Texas. According to the most cited affordability index of the 50 states (C2ER COL Index), Texas is already the 15th most affordable state. Still, the governor, up for reelection this year to a 4th term, recognizes the issue’s importance and wants to move Texas higher in the rankings.
His proposal includes:
- Reducing property taxes by capping annual appraisal growth and making it harder for governments to increase spending.
- Rather than rely on government bureaucrats to give building permits, allow third-party permitting and create pre-approved home designs that would automatically be permitted.
- Allow a new “essential benefits” health insurance plan to reduce those costs.
- Create competition for municipally owned monopoly electric utilities and forbid governments from diverting utility revenue to pay for unrelated spending.
- Continue the freeze on state college tuition.
- Expand safe driving discounts to lower auto insurance costs.
It’s a brilliant plan. Much of the increase in costs for the average person has been caused by increased government spending, taxes, and regulation. Or, in some cases, regulation that prevents the private sector from offering a more cost-effective product. This plan is aimed directly at improving those conditions.
And it makes changes that should affect housing and energy costs, insurance, and tuition – things that will impact virtually every Texan.
How is California dealing with affordability?
Apparently, not well. According to the same C2ER COL affordability index, California is the 3rd least affordable state. Only Hawaii and Massachusetts have a higher cost of living than California. Without question, the affordability problem is much, much greater in California than in Texas.
Therefore, California must have a much bigger and more aggressive plan to deal with the problem than Texas, right?
Oh, ye of little blue state understanding.
Accepting the gravity of the issue, California Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-San Benito) gave an address at the start of the current legislative session, vowing to tackle the problem. In April 2025, he created three select committees to recommend ways to lower costs. The titles of these committees are instructive and vary quite significantly in what Texas is focused on. Those titles are: CalFresh Enrollment and Nutrition; Child Care Costs; and Housing Finance and Affordability.
Sixteen months later, those select committees have produced…nothing.
Governor Gavin Newsom, distracted while trying to become your president by moving to the Left of AOC, has touted some bond issues on the November ballot that will give handouts to certain Democrat constituencies and will no doubt be loaded with fraud like every other California program, and a housing bill that slows down the next set of expensive housing regulations but removes few of the existing ones.
The problem for Democrats is simple. Their policies on climate, unions, government spending, taxes, and regulation are the very things that drive up the cost of everything. Only two of the 20 most affordable states are blue states (New Mexico and Minnesota). For California to truly address the problem, it needs to undo much of what the legislature and governor have done in the last 20 years. But that would be an admission of failure. One trait of Democrats is that they never admit that a policy has failed. If it isn’t working, it is only because they didn’t do enough of it.
So, California Democrats will continue to talk about affordability and blame high costs on Trump, while doing nothing except make the situation worse. Maybe they’ll look to New York for additional ideas on how to implement bad policies, perhaps government-run grocery stores?
In Scottsdale, Arizona, a few years ago, I bought my go-to McDonald’s meal I have been buying for decades: a quarter-pounder with cheese, medium fries, and a milk. Then I got on a plane and bought the exact same meal in Costa Mesa, California, the next day. It cost 70% more in California. The ingredients are the same. The difference, though, is the additional insurance, regulatory, legal, tax, and other costs the California franchisee has to build into the price of that burger, which will probably get even cheaper in the Lone Star State.
God bless Texas.
***
John Campbell was born and raised in Los Angeles, California. He is a Certified Public Accountant, businessman, and former member of Congress who served from 2005 to 2015. He also has a 25-year career in the retail automotive industry, progressing from Corporate Controller to owner/operator and dealer principal, and represented 15 franchises during his career.
