Speaker 1: It's always great to have Alan he Chan on the show. Alan,
Speaker 1: he's a candidate for the State Controller of California, is
Speaker 1: a David Diane Staffy Fellow in American Public Policy Studies
Speaker 1: at the Uber Institution, Director of Domestic Policy Studies at
Speaker 1: Stanford University. Uh Lan he great to talk. How are you.
Speaker 1: I'm doing well. Thanks, guys, great to do with you.
Speaker 1: So you're a numbers guy and you're running for a
Speaker 1: numbers oriented position, and we want to talk about that
Speaker 1: in a couple of minutes. But you know, shortly before
Speaker 1: he passed away, Rush Limbaugh said, there is no longer
Speaker 1: a constituency for fiscal conservatism. Nobody wants to hear about it.
Speaker 1: And certainly if you look at the last couple of
Speaker 1: them in administrations and Congress on both sides of the aisle,
Speaker 1: it looks like he's right. And I just wonder. I know,
Speaker 1: you're not a fortune teller, you're you're a domestic policy expert.
Speaker 1: But with with the hyper inflation, the rampant inflation, the
Speaker 1: brutal prices, working people struggling just to put food on
Speaker 1: the table, at this point, is it possible we'll have
Speaker 1: some sort of national reawakening to the idea of living
Speaker 1: within our means. I think it's entirely possible, especially when
Speaker 1: you understand that part of the reason, I mean a
Speaker 1: big part of the reason why I think we're experiencing
Speaker 1: this massive inflation in the country now is because of
Speaker 1: policy decisions we've made, and decisions that are directly related
Speaker 1: to incredible amounts of fiscal stimulus and spending. Obviously, the
Speaker 1: Federal Reserve has had something to do with that as well,
Speaker 1: and with their easy money policies for a very very
Speaker 1: long period of time. But if you put that assign
Speaker 1: for a minute, I do think people look at the
Speaker 1: environment and they recognize that we can't continue to pursue
Speaker 1: this pathway we're on. The pathway that we're on has
Speaker 1: led to record inflation. And it's not just things that
Speaker 1: you know, people don't buy. It's it's basic commodity like
Speaker 1: gas and milk, household necessities, even travel. I mean, in fact,
Speaker 1: the single biggest component of h of indicators looking at
Speaker 1: the rate of inflation, the single biggest increase has been
Speaker 1: in airline travel in terms of how much we pay
Speaker 1: for airline tickets. I think a horty percent increase year
Speaker 1: over year. So this is stuff where people will look
Speaker 1: and they'll say, Okay, what's happening. Why is our economy
Speaker 1: doing this? And the answer is quite simple. It's because
Speaker 1: nobody has been there to sound the alarm about the
Speaker 1: way in the nature of our spending. If inflation continues
Speaker 1: for a while though, and I think it will, and
Speaker 1: the Republicans take over, will the presidents still get blamed
Speaker 1: or will the Republicans start to take the heat for it,
Speaker 1: because whoever's in charge tends to get blamed for a
Speaker 1: bad economy. Yeah. And and the problem, of course is
Speaker 1: that even if the Republicans win, you know, one or
Speaker 1: two chambers of Congress, nothing's going to happen because whatever
Speaker 1: they would want to do, the president will will be
Speaker 1: against and vice versa. And and you know, we're kind
Speaker 1: of stuck in this difficult cycle for the next couple
Speaker 1: of years. Who takes the political blame? I mean, I
Speaker 1: think part of that is how the politics get played
Speaker 1: out by both sides. But I think that the reality
Speaker 1: is both sides need to wake up to the fact.
Speaker 1: And by the way, Republicans are just as guilty over
Speaker 1: the last couple of years of not being physcally responsible
Speaker 1: of not understanding what happens when you pump all this
Speaker 1: money into the economy, of being in favor of policies
Speaker 1: that unfortunately have driven up our debt and have driven up, uh,
Speaker 1: the amount of spending. But if you put that aside
Speaker 1: for a moment, I do think that both sides have
Speaker 1: the potential to get blamed if this gets worse, because
Speaker 1: now both of their hands are dirty. Well, just they
Speaker 1: have to understand. Yeah, well just one of the reasons
Speaker 1: I wanted to bring that up is um I heard
Speaker 1: some other pundits discussing this, So this is not my
Speaker 1: original idea, but you would think with inflation at a
Speaker 1: forty year high, crime like we haven't seen for decades,
Speaker 1: Republicans would be running away from this thing. Is with
Speaker 1: this thing with this election all over the country is
Speaker 1: opposed to just a slight advantage. So what's going on there? Well,
Speaker 1: it's complicated. I mean, I think in different places the
Speaker 1: the economy is kind of playing in different ways. I
Speaker 1: do agree with the notion that the economy is going
Speaker 1: to be the top issue in this election. I think
Speaker 1: you see it here in California, you eat in other states.
Speaker 1: I think in other states. There are issues, you know,
Speaker 1: whether it's crime or some of the social issues that
Speaker 1: do rise into that top three, top four. But fundamentally,
Speaker 1: I think the polling doesn't reflect where people are on
Speaker 1: the economy and how dominant it is going to be.
Speaker 1: I think people are going to be surprised by how
Speaker 1: predominant it is, and as a result, I do think
Speaker 1: Republicans and many of these House races are going to
Speaker 1: do well. I think in many of the Senate races
Speaker 1: are going to do well. There's a few races where
Speaker 1: where there's some candidate issues, but I do think overall
Speaker 1: the economy is going to be a much more significant
Speaker 1: issue than people are giving a credit for. Because I'll
Speaker 1: tell you when I'm out there on the campaign trail,
Speaker 1: that is all I ever hear about from people is
Speaker 1: why does stuff cost so much? Why are we headed
Speaker 1: for recession? How did we get here? And how do
Speaker 1: we fix it? Hey? Speaking of polling, how do I
Speaker 1: phrase this question? How well are polsters? How how good
Speaker 1: a job repolsters doing these days? In actually reflecting the
Speaker 1: support for Republican candidates and ideas. There's a widespread perception
Speaker 1: among folks who are on the right side of politics,
Speaker 1: and I just mean, you know, average every day folks
Speaker 1: that um that that conservatives are much more hostile to
Speaker 1: polling in general and so don't cooperate. Is there any
Speaker 1: truth to that? Yeah, I do think there's some truth
Speaker 1: to that. I do think that there is. There are
Speaker 1: a couple of things going on. First of all, I
Speaker 1: think that polsters are getting better at actually finding people.
Speaker 1: So for a period of time, as people were shifting
Speaker 1: from landlines the cell phones and their Internet use was increasing,
Speaker 1: polsters had to accommodate the shift in how to reach people.
Speaker 1: But also they had to figure out how do we
Speaker 1: conduct internet polling or online polling in a scientifically valid way.
Speaker 1: And I think that shift, you know, has happened in
Speaker 1: the last couple of years. I think it is essentially
Speaker 1: complete now. So I think they've gotten better at that.
Speaker 1: The problem that you're talking about sort of response bias,
Speaker 1: you know, who answers the questions, who answers them accurately?
Speaker 1: That is a very very real problem. And I think
Speaker 1: if you talk to posters, they'll tell you that they
Speaker 1: have a they have a challenge in terms of measuring
Speaker 1: where right leaning Republican self identified Republican voters are, because
Speaker 1: that is, it can be hard to get either a
Speaker 1: real answer or any answer because there is this distrust
Speaker 1: of the polling industry, particularly amongst some conservatives. So it's
Speaker 1: a it's a problem. I think it's getting better. I
Speaker 1: think that it will be addressed more in their scientific
Speaker 1: ways to correct for some of this, and so hopefully
Speaker 1: we'll have more accurate polling data. But you know, the
Speaker 1: toughest question to answer is, like, you know, what do
Speaker 1: the polls say? Because the reality is pulls a kind
Speaker 1: of all over the place A and B. It's not
Speaker 1: clear they're a an accurate representation of where the electorate is,
Speaker 1: particularly to your point on the right of center. Start
Speaker 1: all right, I don't know if you've been listening to
Speaker 1: our reading what your friend Sarah Iger has been writing
Speaker 1: in the Dispatch about issue polling. She says, it's almost
Speaker 1: completely a waste of time. Do you agree here? Disagree?
Speaker 1: I mean, that's just what's so much about the way
Speaker 1: you pray is the question and who you sample exactly exactly.
Speaker 1: So so issue pulling is it's unique sort of has
Speaker 1: unique difficulties because it is based on how you ask
Speaker 1: the question, and it's also based on whatever your your
Speaker 1: respondents understanding of the issue, and and and then it
Speaker 1: becomes deeply kind of like a personal thing. Right, So
Speaker 1: if you asked them a question about tax cuts, they
Speaker 1: may or may have had some experience with the tax
Speaker 1: code or some experience with a small business or whatever
Speaker 1: that that affects their view of the policy, so that
Speaker 1: you're not actually getting a true representation of the feeling
Speaker 1: about the policy. You're getting you know, they're feeling about
Speaker 1: the economy, or there's something is mixed into how they
Speaker 1: feel about that policy. So it is hard. It's always
Speaker 1: been hard to pull issues, by the way, I mean,
Speaker 1: that's not a new concept. I do think that it
Speaker 1: makes it harder for policy makers to really understand where
Speaker 1: the elector it is and to have public policy that's
Speaker 1: responsive to what the electorate wants. But but it's not
Speaker 1: a new problem, and it's one that certainly is out there.
Speaker 1: So I have a question about the office you're running for,
Speaker 1: and I will reveal to the listening audience my secret
Speaker 1: motive in asking after you answer. But you're you're running
Speaker 1: for California State Controller. What the heck does the state
Speaker 1: controller do? The state controller is the fiscal watchdog, the
Speaker 1: person who's supposed to give accountability for every single dollar
Speaker 1: that they spend. So if you think about California as
Speaker 1: a three hundred billion dollar a year enterprise, that's how
Speaker 1: much we spend every year. Uh. This is the person
Speaker 1: that's supposed to give us accountability and transparency for how
Speaker 1: that money is spent. But more importantly, is supposed to
Speaker 1: tell us how the spending is working. Is it achieving results?
Speaker 1: Is it not? And so it is a particularly important
Speaker 1: position at a time when California is spending more than
Speaker 1: ever and some of our challenges here, whether it's homelessness
Speaker 1: or public safety or the state of our public schools,
Speaker 1: some of those challenges I think are bigger than they've
Speaker 1: been at any point in my life. The idea of
Speaker 1: the government of California taking time to make sure it's
Speaker 1: spending money wisely and efficiently. I'll donate my next two
Speaker 1: paychecks and a kidney if that will help you. I mean,
Speaker 1: because it's so important. So here's here's my secret motive
Speaker 1: in bringing this up. Off year elections and so called
Speaker 1: down ballot races are important, and I just want to
Speaker 1: convey to the listeners the forces that would turn wherever
Speaker 1: you live into another California, or make California even worse,
Speaker 1: they turn out their people to elect controllers or attorney city,
Speaker 1: attorney's county attorney's, attorneys general, that sort of thing. School boards.
Speaker 1: We've all learned how important that is. Show up and vote,
Speaker 1: especially in the off year elections. I agree, I agree
Speaker 1: totally with you. That's hugely important. And and you you
Speaker 1: mentioned a lot of these these races. I mean, the
Speaker 1: school board races are critical, but also the races for
Speaker 1: these down ballot offices. We have eight statewide constitutional officers
Speaker 1: in California, and all of them play an important role.
Speaker 1: And people need to understand and study the ballot and
Speaker 1: and make informed decisions. Should you be controlling the fact
Speaker 1: that the Los Angeles Dodgers with a two million dollar
Speaker 1: payroll are attempting to buy a World Series championship. Listen, listen,
Speaker 1: it's not There's no such thing as buying a World
Speaker 1: Series Championship. They're gonna go out there, They're gonna go
Speaker 1: out there and earn it. They're gonna go out there
Speaker 1: and earn it. As every confidence they're gonna win this series.
Speaker 1: I always always like it when people say this sort
Speaker 1: of thing because I've been a you know, following this
Speaker 1: angle in sports for a long time. The Mets, who
Speaker 1: didn't make the playoffs have the number one payroll. The Padres,
Speaker 1: who are the young up starts trying to take on
Speaker 1: the Dodgers, have the fourth highest payroll in all of baseball.
Speaker 1: So there you go. I was gonna say, what are
Speaker 1: your communist? It's a for profit business. Hey, we're up
Speaker 1: against a break lin he. But it's always great to
Speaker 1: talk to you, long he Chan, candidate for California State
Speaker 1: Controller with the Hoover Institution Stanford University. Always a pleasure, sir,
Speaker 1: stay in touch. Great to be thank you are getting