Karen Bass and Nithya Raman offer different plans for housing, homelessness, public safety and affordability. But does either campaign give Los Angeles a clear vision for its future?
In 2005, Antonio Villaraigosa took office as mayor of Los Angeles, asking Angelenos to “Dream with Me.” Eight years later, Eric Garcetti came into office with a very different message: “Back to Basics.”
Those phrases were simple, but they offered voters something larger than a list of policies. They suggested a direction for the city and what City Hall should be trying to accomplish.
The city’s recent political history offers other examples of campaigns trying to reduce a complicated city to a simple idea. James Hahn’s 2001 campaign emphasized his City Hall experience, using the line “L.A. experience that really counts” in its television ads. After taking office, Hahn described his approach in more practical terms, promising to “speak less and work more.” His message was less aspirational than Villaraigosa’s “Dream with Me,” but it was still an argument about what kind of mayor Los Angeles needed.
More than two decades after Villaraigosa’s inauguration, the question in this year’s mayoral race is whether Los Angeles is hearing anything comparable from Mayor Karen Bass or Councilmember Nithya Raman.
A recent Times Opinion roundtable raised precisely that question. Mike Bonin, a former Los Angeles City Councilmember, said he did not see either candidate articulating a clear vision for the city. Bonin’s comment was his own assessment during an Opinion discussion, not a conclusion by The Times. And neither candidate is without an agenda. Both Bass and Raman have laid out detailed positions on housing, homelessness, public safety, affordability and the future of the city.
The question is whether those policies have been turned into a single, recognizable message.
Bass: Change through City Hall
Bass is running for a second term with a message centered on what she describes as tangible progress during her first four years.
On her campaign website, Bass points to reductions in street homelessness, lower crime, nearly 40,000 housing units being accelerated, and a new infrastructure plan focused on streets, sidewalks, and streetlights. Her campaign describes her goal as changing Los Angeles by tackling problems that previous leaders avoided.
Her first general election television advertisement, “I Don’t Run,” puts a different emphasis on her leadership. The ad focuses on Bass’s confrontation with federal immigration agents during the MacArthur Park operation and presents her as a mayor willing to stand up to the federal government.
Bass also argues that Los Angeles is beginning to turn a corner on some of its longstanding problems. Her campaign describes a future city where working people can afford to live, neighborhoods are safer, homelessness is reduced, and restaurants, soundstages and downtown Los Angeles are thriving again.
It is a message built around experience, action and continuity: the argument that the work has begun and needs another term to be completed.
Raman: Build a city that works
Raman is offering a different argument.
Her campaign describes her central goal as making Los Angeles affordable and functional for ordinary residents. Its language repeatedly returns to the idea of building “a city that works.”
Housing is at the center of that vision. Raman says her administration would triple annual housing construction and expand housing at every income level, including affordable housing, market-rate housing, social housing, and shelter. She also emphasizes stronger renter protections and faster approval of housing projects.
On homelessness, Raman argues that the city needs more accountability for the hundreds of millions of dollars it spends on the crisis. Her platform points to programs and changes she says produced reductions in homelessness in her council district and proposes applying that approach citywide.
Her public safety plan is also broader than policing alone. Raman proposes expanding unarmed responses through 911, improving police deployment and accountability, strengthening civilian oversight and investing in community violence prevention. She also makes immigrant protection a central part of her platform, including defending Los Angeles as a sanctuary city.
And she wants City Hall to play a more active role in the local economy, including making it easier to start and operate small businesses and bringing more film and television production back to Los Angeles.
Her basic proposition is straightforward: Los Angeles should be more affordable, more functional and more accountable to the people who live here.
The voters are still listening
The latest Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll, co-sponsored by The Los Angeles Times, found Raman leading Bass among likely voters, 39% to 28%, with 33% undecided. The Times reported that the poll showed Raman with an 11-point advantage as the Nov. 3 election approached.
The numbers among Latino voters are even more pronounced. In the Berkeley IGS and Times poll, Raman led Bass 45% to 21%, while 34% of Latino voters remained undecided. The Times reported that the survey included 427 Latino voters and had a margin of error of about 6 percentage points for that group.
Those numbers do not tell us what message will ultimately define the campaign. They do show that a large share of voters remains available to be persuaded, particularly among Latino voters.
That makes the question of messaging more than a question of campaign branding.
Villaraigosa’s “Dream with Me” was not a housing plan. Garcetti’s “Back to Basics” was not a detailed policy platform. Hahn’s “L.A. experience that really counts” was not a governing blueprint. Each was shorthand for a broader theory of what Los Angeles needed.
Bass and Raman have plenty of policies. Bass argues that her administration has begun changing the city and needs more time to finish the work. Raman argues that Los Angeles needs a fundamental shift toward affordability, functioning services and greater accountability.
What remains to be seen is whether either candidate can turn those ideas into the kind of simple civic proposition that voters can carry with them after the campaign ads disappear.
For a city frustrated with housing costs, homelessness, public safety and the performance of City Hall, the question may not simply be what the next mayor plans to do.
It may be what that mayor wants Los Angeles to become.
