Former California governor Pete Wilson, though out of office since 1999, left behind a complex and controversial legacy deeply entwined with policies that aimed to curb diversity. His time in office was marked by initiatives widely criticized as racist, fundamentally altering the political landscape of California and continuing to spark debate decades later.
Wilson’s governorship became synonymous with anti-affirmative action stances, a vehement opposition to bilingual education, and aggressive measures targeting undocumented immigrants, denying them access to essential public services. As California confronts its past and present issues of racial inequality, the re-examination of Wilson’s policies is more pertinent than ever, especially as the state contemplates overturning the very ban on affirmative action he championed. In a significant move in late June 2020, California state senators voted overwhelmingly to put Proposition 16 on the ballot, giving voters the power to repeal the affirmative action ban initially enacted under Wilson’s leadership.
“In the 90s we were sold a bill of goods – that the way to solve inequality was to legislate colorblindness. Twenty-five years later, it’s clear it was a failed experiment,” stated California Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, a key figure in the movement to repeal the ban, highlighting the long-term repercussions of Wilson’s policies.
California’s 1996 ban on affirmative action, spearheaded by Wilson, made it the first of eight states to take such a step. While previous attempts to reverse this ban have faltered, the current national reckoning on racial injustice, amplified by a pandemic disproportionately affecting communities of color, has injected new urgency into the conversation. This renewed momentum underscores the enduring shadow of Pete Wilson California policies and their continued relevance in contemporary socio-political discussions.
Proposition 187: A Defining Moment in Pete Wilson’s California Governorship
The specter of Proposition 187 looms large in any analysis of Pete Wilson’s California governorship. In 1994, during a heated re-election campaign against Democrat Kathleen Brown, Wilson embraced Proposition 187, a deeply divisive measure designed to exclude undocumented immigrants from accessing public services, most notably education.
The campaign for Proposition 187 was characterized by inflammatory rhetoric and imagery. A now-infamous campaign video utilized grainy footage purportedly showing migrants crossing the border near San Diego, accompanied by a narrator warning of an “invasion” and lamenting the financial burden on the state. “They keep coming. Two million illegal immigrants in California. The federal government won’t stop them, yet requires us to pay billions to take care of them,” the narration declared, fueling anxieties and prejudices.
This campaign strategy polarized California, fundamentally reshaping its political dynamics. Over 10,000 students across California mobilized in protest, walking out of schools to demonstrate against Proposition 187. This widespread activism, part of a broader month-long campaign of education and advocacy, represented some of the largest protest gatherings seen in the state since the Vietnam War era.
Despite the massive protests, voters approved Proposition 187 by a significant margin. Although the measure was ultimately deemed unconstitutional and struck down by the courts, Pete Wilson’s legacy remained inextricably linked to what was widely perceived as a campaign rooted in racism and xenophobia.
Wilson, when questioned about these accusations, defended his stance. He told the Los Angeles Times in 2019, “Every time I have ever challenged [critics] to find one word that could be construed as racism in the campaign for 187, they have been unable to do so.”
However, political analysts like John Pitney, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College and former Republican National Committee staffer, offer a different perspective. Pitney argues that regardless of Wilson’s personal intentions, the message conveyed through the Proposition 187 campaign resonated as racist to many. “The rhetoric, the imagery, the people crossing the border – from Wilson’s perspective, he was talking about undocumented immigrants. Others heard ‘they’ as referring more broadly to Hispanic people. One can debate what was on Pete Wilson’s mind, but in politics, what matters is what people hear, and they very clearly heard a racist appeal,” Pitney explained.
Image alt text: Prop 187 campaign ad visual: Undocumented immigrants running, symbolizing border concerns in Pete Wilson’s California.
John Skrentny, a sociology professor at the University of California, San Diego, further elaborated on the political strategy employed. He pointed out that Republicans of that era often utilized racially coded language and leveraged referenda and court decisions to advance policies with racial undertones while attempting to distance themselves from direct accusations of racism. “Using referenda and the courts to do the racial dirty work has long been the Republican strategy to avoid blame,” Skrentny asserted. “We’re talking about a referendum that the voters themselves passed. That gives him cover to say, ‘See? It wasn’t me. The voters decided.’”
In 1997, Proposition 187 was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge, preventing its full implementation. However, its impact on California’s political climate and Pete Wilson’s California legacy was already deeply entrenched.
The Ban on Bilingual Education: Proposition 227 and Educational Divides in California
Beyond immigration, Pete Wilson’s California governorship also targeted bilingual education. He championed Proposition 227, a ballot measure that effectively banned bilingual education by mandating that public schools primarily teach classes in English.
Proponents of Proposition 227 argued that it was necessary to address literacy challenges in schools and falsely claimed that large numbers of students were being held back in Spanish-only educational environments. These arguments, however, lacked empirical evidence and overlooked the potential benefits of bilingual education.
The implementation of Proposition 227 created a de facto two-tiered education system within California. English-language learners were often segregated into separate classrooms focused on language acquisition, while their native English-speaking peers pursued college preparatory coursework. A 2002 study commissioned by the state board of education concluded that the ban on bilingual education, a cornerstone of Pete Wilson California education policy, failed to improve English-learners’ academic progress compared to their peers, directly contradicting the claims made by its supporters.
In 2016, California voters overwhelmingly rejected Proposition 227, with nearly 75% voting to repeal the ban on bilingual education. This decision consigned Proposition 227 to history alongside Proposition 187, marking a significant shift away from the anti-diversity policies of the Wilson era.
Affirmative Action and the Ongoing Debate: Proposition 16 and Racial Equity in California
The debate surrounding affirmative action in California today echoes the divisive political atmosphere of the 1990s under Pete Wilson. The push to repeal the affirmative action ban through Proposition 16 has reignited conversations about racial equity and opportunity in the state.
During an emotionally charged session in the state senate in June 2020, lawmakers of color shared personal experiences of discrimination. State Senator Steven Bradford, a Black Democrat from Los Angeles, challenged his white colleagues to consider their experiences with racial isolation. “I know about discrimination. I live it every day. We live it in this building,” Bradford stated, adding, “Quit lying to yourselves and saying race is not a factor … the bedrock of who we are in this country is based on race.”
In contrast, Republican Senator Melissa Melendez from Murrieta rejected the notion of systemic racism in California and the US. This exchange reflects the deep ideological divide that persists regarding race and equality, a divide exacerbated by the legacy of Pete Wilson California policies.
Image alt text: California State Senator Steve Bradford celebrates affirmative action repeal vote, reflecting current racial justice movements in California.
Assemblywoman Gonzalez underscored the stark racial disparities highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic, further weakening the argument for colorblind policies. Latinos, while comprising 39% of California’s population, accounted for a disproportionate 56% of coronavirus cases and 46% of deaths, according to California public health data. These statistics starkly contrast with those for white Californians, who represent almost 37% of the population but only 17% of cases and 30% of deaths.
“Look at who is contracting and dying from Covid right now. It started in affluent areas, but it quickly, quickly, revealed race-based disparities,” Gonzalez pointed out, emphasizing the urgent need to address systemic inequities.
Interestingly, Republicans have become less vocal in their opposition to affirmative action in recent years. Political analyst John Pitney notes, “Even if you have a red meat speech that hits on all the major conservative talking points, they don’t mention it. A lot of Republicans think if they bring it up, they’ll lose more than they’ll gain by being seen as racist.”
The focus on college admissions highlights the ongoing impact of the affirmative action ban. Despite efforts to diversify, the University of California system, while admitting a record number of Latino students recently, still struggles with underrepresentation of Black and Latino students at its most selective campuses, as highlighted by a recent Urban Institute analysis.
Janet Napolitano, then UC president, issued a statement supporting the repeal of the affirmative action ban, arguing, “It makes little sense to exclude any consideration of race in admissions when the aim of the University’s holistic process is to fully understand and evaluate each applicant through multiple dimensions… The diversity of our university and higher education institutions across California, should – and must – represent the rich diversity of our state.”
The Unintended Legacy: “Thank You, Pete Wilson” and the Rise of Latino Political Power in California
Lorena Gonzalez, now a prominent figure in California politics, reflects on the galvanizing effect of Pete Wilson’s California policies, particularly Proposition 187. As a graduate student during the 1994 campaign, she witnessed firsthand the scapegoating of the Latino community.
“It was so clear that we as a community were being used as scapegoats. It was really personal,” Gonzalez recalled. The passage of Proposition 187 prompted a profound reaction within the Latino community, transforming political apathy into active engagement.
In commemoration of the 25th anniversary of the Proposition 187 campaign, Gonzalez and other members of the California Legislative Latino Caucus released a video titled “Thank you, Pete Wilson.” In this video, Latino lawmakers acknowledge that the backlash against Wilson’s anti-immigrant policies served as a catalyst for their political mobilization and rise to power.
The aftermath of Proposition 187 saw a surge in Latino naturalization and voter registration, with over a million immigrants becoming citizens and registered voters. The Latino Legislative Caucus expanded to a record 29 members, playing a pivotal role in establishing Democratic supermajorities in both houses of the California legislature.
Assemblyman Freddie Rodriguez declared, “You woke a sleeping giant,” while Assemblyman Todd Gloria emphasized that California now possessed a “roadmap on how to fight back against racist, xenophobic policies.”
John Skrentny of UC San Diego connects Pete Wilson and the backlash against his policies directly to the decline of the Republican party in California. He argues that Wilson’s anti-diversity measures, while intended to solidify Republican support, ultimately energized Democratic voters and accelerated existing demographic and political shifts. Skrentny suggests a parallel between Wilson’s impact on California and the potential national consequences of similar divisive politics. “Wilson stands for the decline of Republican party in California. Those blatantly anti-diversity measures inspired voters and reinvigorated the Democratic party. And frankly I do think he caused that.”
As California continues to grapple with issues of racial justice and equity, the legacy of Pete Wilson California governorship remains a crucial point of reference. While experts hold differing views on the ultimate outcome of the renewed affirmative action debate, Assemblywoman Gonzalez sees progress in the evolving conversation. “We had Republicans in each house vote for this. The success is that people are opening their hearts and minds to the fact that the [ban on affirmative action] failed and we have an opportunity to get it right. It’s important to get rid of the vestiges of Pete Wilson.”
Pete Wilson’s time as governor left an indelible mark on California, shaping its political landscape and sparking ongoing debates about race, immigration, and equality. His policies, while intended to address specific concerns, ultimately had far-reaching and often unintended consequences, contributing to the very demographic and political shifts he sought to resist.
