There’s nothing dishonorable about changing one’s mind or political affiliation. In fact, a willingness to change often implies an evidence-based intelligence.
When a prominent national figure like J.D.Vance, formerly known as James Donald Bowman, went from referring to Donald Trump as a possible Hitler to becoming his running mate, it’s always possible his motivations were pure and rational.
On the other hand, opportunism, especially political opportunism, is often regarded as a sign of malleable principles, held only as long as they seem self-serving. So when California State Senator Marie Alavardo-Gil recently changed her political affiliation from Democrat to Republican, it’s possible she’d had a close study of her district’s strong Republican tilt for registered voters rather than any deep change of heart and mind.
The problem in Alvardo-Gil’s case is that her explanation for the party switch doesn’t add up. Alvardo-Gil claims she switched parties because of pressure from Democratic Party leadership to weaken a crime bill. Two parts of that excuse don’t pass the sniff test.
First, in a state legislature with a supermajority Democratic membership, Alvardo-Gil will have far less influence as a Republican than as a Democrat. Second, if she thinks the Democratic Party is too doctrinaire and authoritarian, she’s apparently not been paying attention to the fate of Republicans who buck the party line.
In fact, Republicans don’t even have to veer from the party line to be ostracized and booted out. Just ask Kevin McCarthy, formerly a major Republican player in Valley and national politics. All McCarthy did was irk Donald Trump; once he did that, his dreams of a long term as Speaker of the House of Representatives vanished like a desert mirage. So did his career in politics.
Today, there’s no room in the Republican Party for mavericks like the late Senator John McCain, who often bucked the party line but remained in good favor both with his constituents and nationally. Since it was only a few weeks ago that Senator Alvarado-Gil endorsed Kamala Harris and a bit earlier than that when she endorsed Joe Biden, her change of values must have come on fast. Since she’s not up for election until 2026, Alvarado-Gil may be hoping the Republican voters in her district forget those endorsements.
She may also want Republican voters to forget the pro-choice and pro-LBBTQ positions she held while running for office. The problem for Alvarado-Gil is that whoever runs against her in 2026 will almost certainly be a deep-rooted Republican who will make her former positions red meat for Republican voters whose memories may be short but easily recovered during a heated political campaign.
And if Alvarado-Gil really wanted an example of how to successfully legislate from a position of dissent and disagreement, she needed only look at Valley politicians like Adam Gray at the local level and Dennis Cardoza at the national level. Both Gray and Cardoza had successful political careers as “Blue Dog” Democrats who held dissenting opinions on some party issues even while retaining their political identities.
Gray, who served the Valley in the State Assembly and is currently running for a seat in the House of Representatives, often disagreed with his party leaders. He still managed to serve his constituents by boosting education and health care funding, especially in connection with the University of California at Merced. Most recently, Gray was a prime mover in acquiring state money for the improvement of Dos Rios State Park, which will not only provide recreational opportunities for Valley residents but also play a critical role in flood control and groundwater recharge.
Political expediency is nothing new and most politicians are guilty of it at some time or another. The real question for voters is about bedrock values. Ultimately, people want to know where their leaders stand on the core issues that define party affiliation. They usually don’t want someone whose values tend to shift with the wind.
Whether Senator Alvardo-Gil will withstand the scrutiny that’s sure to come when she seeks a new term remains to be seen. For now, she has to hope Republicans who run against her in 2026 fail at exposing her apostate views, most especially her very recent endorsements of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
Well written sir! She was a fake Democrat in her values in speeches. But money speaks and unfortunately that is a big reason she won against Tim Robertson. My belief anyway! Unfortunately the Democratic party saw fit to be behind both during the primary. She had wealthy backers helping her. Tim had less. Now we have to live with the results till next election.
Whoever she’s up against in 2026 will make short work of her. If “ her values shift with the wind”, she can’t stand for anything. Good riddance to bad representatives.