For years, conservative politicians and pundits have pointed to California as a cautionary tale. They cite homelessness in San Francisco, rising crime in Los Angeles, and the cost of living across the state as evidence of liberal governance gone off the rails. Rarely do they mention the full story, and even more rarely do Democratic leaders respond directly. But this week, Governor Gavin Newsom did just that—firmly and publicly pushing back against what has become a well-worn narrative.
In a direct response to Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who claimed that “what’s happening in California would never happen here in Arkansas because we value order over chaos,” Newsom replied with a brutal fact: “Your homicide rate is literally double California’s.” His message was sharp, but it was also backed by data. A widely cited graphic circulating alongside his response stated: “PSA: 8 out of 10 states with the highest murder rates are red states.”
That claim checks out. According to a study by the centrist think tank Third Way, states that voted for Donald Trump in the 2020 election accounted for eight of the ten highest murder rates in the country. The same report found that these so-called “red states” had an average murder rate 40 percent higher than the states that went for Joe Biden. These figures stand in stark contrast to the dominant political messaging that paints liberal jurisdictions as uniquely violent or lawless.
The Davis Vanguard has previously reported on this disconnect, highlighting both statewide data and city-level comparisons that challenge the dominant narrative. A 2022 commentary noted that in Oklahoma, for instance, the cities of Tulsa and Oklahoma City—both located in a state with one of the highest incarceration rates in the country—had murder rates nearly twice that of Los Angeles. Meanwhile, Fresno and Bakersfield, both governed by Republican mayors, posted homicide rates significantly higher than San Francisco. In Jacksonville, Florida, a politically conservative city led by a GOP mayor, the number of murders in 2020 exceeded those in San Francisco by 128, despite the cities having comparable populations.
The problem with the conservative talking point is not just that it’s inaccurate. It’s that it ignores the policy failures happening in the very states making these claims. Crime is a serious issue in many parts of the country. But when it comes to the highest rates of violent crime, the data points squarely toward red states—states that have embraced harsh criminal justice policies, rejected social safety nets, and underinvested in education and health care.
What many of these states have in common is not just their political alignment, but a pattern of policy decisions that produce poor outcomes across the board. States like Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Kentucky, and West Virginia frequently rank at the bottom of national measures for poverty, health, education, and overall well-being. In these places, the failure to expand Medicaid, the erosion of public education funding, and the persistent use of punitive criminal justice policies have created conditions that are ripe for social dislocation and violence.
Life expectancy in many red states is lower than the national average, with higher rates of chronic illness, obesity, and preventable deaths. Many of these states refused to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, a choice that left millions without access to affordable health care. At the same time, these states often maintain some of the lowest minimum wages and most regressive tax systems in the nation, contributing to entrenched poverty.
Educational outcomes in red states also tell a troubling story. Data from the National Center for Education Statistics and Education Week’s annual “Quality Counts” report shows that many red states spend significantly less per pupil than their blue state counterparts and have lower teacher pay and academic performance metrics. The long-term consequences of these choices are visible in workforce readiness, economic stagnation, and yes—crime.
None of this is to say that California is without problems. It is true that cities like Oakland, Los Angeles, and San Francisco have seen spikes in property crime and visible homelessness, particularly in the wake of the pandemic. These challenges are real and should not be dismissed. But they are not unique, and they are not proof that progressive governance is inherently flawed.
What the data suggests, instead, is that crime—particularly violent crime—is a national problem shaped by a multitude of factors, including poverty, inequality, access to healthcare and education, and the availability of firearms. Sociologists like Patrick Sharkey have described what he calls the “rigid geography of violence,” noting that crime remains concentrated in particular neighborhoods regardless of broader state politics. What’s important is how states choose to respond—through investment in public services or through rhetoric that scapegoats other regions.
Newsom’s decision to go on the offensive may mark a turning point in the way Democrats respond to right-wing criticism. For too long, progressive leaders have allowed the narrative to be shaped by those who point fingers at blue states while ignoring the crises festering in their own backyards. By calling out the hypocrisy—and citing data to back it up—Newsom did more than defend California. He exposed the hollow core of the red-state narrative.
He may not be the first to say it, but in this moment, Newsom was the one who showed up. He said what needed to be said: that cherry-picking crime stories from liberal cities while ignoring the systemic failures in conservative states is not just misleading—it’s dishonest.
In a time when truth often takes a backseat to spin, that kind of honesty matters. And for many Americans waiting for someone to push back with facts, it may be enough to make Gavin Newsom matter again.
