California is ailing. Our unemployment rate is the third highest in the nation. We have lost approximately 600,000 jobs just since Democrats returned to power in Washington. Our state budget is in the red. State public employee pensions threaten to push us toward insolvency. Storefronts sits vacant on once-thriving commercial thoroughfares. The Golden State has lost its luster.
And yet, we had an election where the main issues had little to do with the state’s fiscal health and very much to do with the Republican gubernatorial nominee’s personal wealth and touchy temperament. In short, the issues of the recent campaign had nothing to do with the problems facing California.
When my father this morning called to express incredulity that the state could return Jerry Brown to the Governor’s mansion, I said it was like a homeowner with a leaky roof on a house where he could barely afford the mortgage payments hiring a contractor to build a new veranda. Perhaps, the better analogy would have been to say that instead of talking about a new veranda, he was intent on hiring a green landscaper.
Brown talked about “green jobs” while the various candidates for statewide office ran on promises of promoting pro-environmental policies. Should the legislature follow through on these promises , expect to see increasing numbers of businesses flee the state while those that remain will have to devote more resources to meeting state environmental mandates and fewer to increasing their operations, thus not able to create new jobs for out-of-work Californians or generate more revenue for the state’s increasingly depleted coffers.
California’s problems today aren’t an absence of so-called “green” policies, but an excess of them and, as Monty put it on Ace of Spades:
California’s most dire problems right now are related to public-employee obligations (pensions and healthcare). The power of public-employee unions in California have held the State and local governments in thrall for years, and with the election of Jerry Brown as Governor, the people of California have opted to spray kerosene on a blaze that was already threatening to overwhelm them.
With the passage of Prop. 25 as well as last night’s election returns, California Democrats, as Monty put it, “get to own the mess they made in the first place.” Let’s hope that, in future elections, people hold them accountable.
NB: In the original version of this post, I had incorrectly said that California’s unemployment was the highest in the nation. It’s actually the third highest. Since fixed.
So, I’m in a position to move my primary residence to NV and thinking about doing it for tax reasons. Hmmm. (ILC thinking)
Doubtfully.
#1 thought I smelled smoke 😛
As to the OP: It can be saved, but California is like an alcoholic. The state as a whole is engaging in self destructive behaviour, and yesterday showed they’ve not hit bottom yet to seek real help. The key will be to keep California’s 49 ‘brothers and sisters’ to let him hit bottom, even though it hurts them, rather than buying yet another ‘last bottle’ of cheap wine.
Once CA hits bottom, it will then be up to CA to build themselves up, or the rest of us to build a wall and give them back to Mexico.
For as long as I can remember (I am 68) to Californicate meant to adopt liberal social engineering ideas to “fix” things by government fiddling, experimentation, fiat, or just arrogant sledgehammering.
It appears that no idea is too looney to be funded. Furthermore, anything that smacks of social conservatism is not just taboo, but a cancer to be attacked with more and more “government” money.
Modern day liberal elitism is a study in spending other people’s money on dragging common and stupid people by the hair into utopia and tweaking around the periphery in hopes the stupid people will wake up and smell the flowers.
When a government is wide open to spending other people’s money on grand schemes, it is also open to all the shady characters who gather wherever pork is plentiful. Soon, state legislatures spend like Chicago aldermen and the capitol becomes the valve room of patronage, funding and spending to stimulate the inward flow of other people’s money.
I do not see any signs showing that California Looney Tunes government spending and overreaching is of concern to the electorate. What I see is addicts scratching for their next fix.
It is a lousy time for the California electorate to look to Washington for more other people’s money. Not only is California not too big to fail, but a lot of stupid, common people would not mind seeing Ed Asner’s* head explode.
(*) Substitute any Hollywood bubble head zillionaire who totally knows how stupid, common people should live.
#3 TL, good one 🙂
Somebody, last night, said that if it weren’t for Arnold, Whitman would have coasted through. Does that sound right?
I’d rather not see CA fail in any sense. The electoral outcomes were disappointing, but at some point conservatives like you guys have to accept that “the People” spoke if you honestly buy into local decision making.
Maybe the lesson for 2012 in CA is to make sure the election results are announced early on Gen E Day 12 and hope to suppress the influence of CA’s left voting populations on the American prez selection?
A case can be made for that. Ahnuld was supposed to be the archetypal moderate pro-abortion, pro-amnesty but also fiscally responsible pro-business Republican. But he showed his true colors by increasing state spending 50% and gleefully signing Draconian climate change legislation that drove business out of the state.
Moderate Republicans will continue to lack credibility on Fiscal Responsibility unless they actually do like Chris Christie and cut bureaucratic spending.
And that’s another thing. We conservatives need to stop talking about cutting government spending, and start talking about cutting bureaucratic spending. When you say you’re going to cut ‘Government,’ the left naturally says you’re going to fire teachers, cops, and firefighters. If you say you’re going to cut ‘Bureaucracy,’ people think about the bitch at the MVA who made them go to the back of the line because they forgot to mark a box on page six of their license application.
Central Planning is a doctrine that demands that all citizens must seek government consent before they are allowed to act in their own self interest. It is a contract that binds all citizens, to all other citizens, without their consent.
Jerry Brown made it clear that this is how he intends to rule. While private citizens should bare 100% of the risk for any new venture, government will have the primary share of all profits.
Everyone must “pay their fair share” of the Socialist vision, especially those that don’t believe in Socialism. (“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”)
.
Move out of the hellhole before the state goes bankrupt. Companies have been moving out already at a peak pace; with Brown’s election, California will creep into mediocrity & economic collapse.
Walk, do not run, to the nearest plainly-marked exit.
Do not stop for dropped objects unless they’re (your own) small children.
My only objection is that we-the-taxpayers in the ‘other-49’ States are going to have to pay-off the debts left by California’s mess… just like the Banks, AIG, and GM/Chrysler…since California’s too-big-to-fail.
The idiocy continues: San Fransicko votes to ban Happy Meals.
So, let’s review San Francisco values: Public sex in front of children – good. Happy Meals – bad.
When major business and industries “go Galt” and leave CA, maybe then the electorate there will finally wake up.
Regards,
Peter H.
I’m sorry to have to say it. To any conservatives I’ll say the same thing I’ve said to my brother who is still in Michigan.
Those of you still left in CA.
The great thing about America is that you can still move to other places. Whether NV, SC, TX, NC, TN that don’t have such oppressive state govt. All the best as you make the call. I now live in rural PA, hailing from MI. And it is glorious to live in a conservative boro, and county. And now, the added bonus, PA has a Republican Gov, Senator and both Houses of the Legislature!!!
God Bless America.
As a proud native Arizonan I am ALL for the troubles that will be forthcoming from California. Our Chamber of Commerce will be placing appropriate advertisements in ALL the best locations mapping out the quickest way OUT. Thank you for your attention during this CRITICAL message.
Gene,
I have to admit that after the DISASTROUS results here in MA I’m seriously thinking about moving.
Gene offers: “I now live in rural PA, hailing from MI. And it is glorious to live in a conservative boro, and county. And now, the added bonus, PA has a Republican Gov, Senator and both Houses of the Legislature!!!”
Hey Gene, we can now say the same thing for Michigan –we’ve got a GOP Gov, GOP Lt Gov, GOP Atty Gen (remember Frank Kelly?), a GOP Secy of State (remember Dick Austin?), a majority of GOPers on the Supreme Ct, the Ct of Appeals, the boards of regents for Wayne State, MSU, the University of Michigan, Stae Bd of Education, as well as a supermajority in the state Senate (28 v 12) and a controlling majority in the state House.
We’re almost as red as rural PA –or Wyoming, for that matter. Come on back, the water is still beautiful, the dunes still alluring and the spirit of Michiganders now have a renewed, refreshed pride in the future.
Except in the rotting, fetid urban cities controlled by corrupt Democrats.
California is to liberal politics the same way an alcoholic is to booze. California needs to realize it has a problem; that clearly hasn’t happened yet. It needs to not be helped out by enablers (specifically, bailouts from the federal government). What would really turn California around though, I think, is for its voters to be able to look at other states—maybe AZ, maybe TX, maybe even NJ after a few more years of Christie—and instead of sneer at that state’s conservative policies, they would want to emulate those states. Think of someone like Star Parker. For years, she embraced the whole big government dependency culture. At some point, she realized her life would be better if she emulated successful people around her. California should follow Star Parker’s example. But California apparently is not ready to do that, as evidenced by her loss yesterday.
Hello, I came to the Gay Patriot to read about the Iowa justices being kicked out for approving equal marriage rights for citizens who are gay. I didn’t see anything here, so please point me to the articles that cover this. Also, if you’ve posted the results for the GLBT office holders and candidates who won or lost, let me know where that is. And what does the Gay Patriot think about gay civil rights in the next two years? Will they go forward or backwards. It would seem at first glance that legislative repeal of DADT and DOMA are now dead, and only the courts might move us forward. What do you think?
Also, do you know any demographics on the GLBT’s voting demographics? Are we showing up or staying home now?
FIFY
BTW, Iowa was one of the few states the wave didn’t strike. All of its Democrat congressmen were reelected. Which means the same people who voted out those justices went on to vote for Democrat congressmen.
Interesting, no?
Thanks for the response V. Do you agree with Rand Paul that private businesses were victims of the courts “legislating from the bench” when they declared discriminatory laws against racial minorities unconstitutional?
Minnesota seemed to have plenty of ticket-splitters. Dayton (the former senator who famously shut down his office over some terrorist threat that no one else considered serious) seems to have won the governship albeit with a razor-thin margin. And AG, sec of state, and state auditor all went to the Dems. But we managed to knock off Oberstar (in congress of 36 years) and swing both houses of the state legislature to the Republicans. Never in my life has the GOP controlled both houses of the MN legislature. And yet we will probably have a Democratic governor for the first time in 20 years. Strange.
Chad, hasn’t Minnesota always had a track record of failing to follow one party or the other? Thus, Jesse Ventura, etc.
V the K made me do a little homework because I was curious about his claim that Iowa was all blue this year in regards to the election while throwing out the judges who granted gay citizens equal rights. It turns out there were a mere 3 Democratic incumbents in the house from Iowa. Iowa Republicans won the governor/Senate races again as well as the rest of the Congressional seats. It’s a very strong state for the GOP.
Regardless of which side one is on regarding the rights of gay citizens, the court case led by Ted Olson should be very interesting to follow.
Court case filed by Ted Olson shouldn’t have gone anywhere equity. See Baker v. Nelson. A 9-0 decision that settled the question.
If Republicans want to win and win really big again one day, they’ve got to get off this idea that wealthy business people are the answer. It was wealthy business who were the central focus of the decline of the economy (which pretty much began around the time Republicans took control of Congress and the White House).
You can whine all you want about this started when Democrats re-took control in Jan of 2007, but the signs and beginnings of massive economic were already well in place before then. Seems more people ae aware that business people exist for the purpose of profit, not to govern at the will of for the people as a whole. We had all those tax cuts for the wealthy all those years – truth is, it didn’t stimulate the economy to keep rolling – all that money rolled into their pockets and off-shore (along with a heck of a lot US jobs).
Why no mention of Prop 23? This would have nullified most of the green policies. California has selected its leader. Now live with it. It would have to go into a ditch before anyone will wake up to fix it. A light in the tunnel was the passage of redistricting proposition. Maybe more Republicans will be elected. It might not matter anyways with all those Democrats in office.
Baker v. Nelson is a Minnesota state case and it does not settle the issue federally in spite of the fact that the state judges referenced the US constitution. Perry v Schwarzenegger has been taken on by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. They could have rejected hearing the case if it was moot.
But why do I get the feeling I am posting on the Christian Coalition website here? Is there anyone else gay or at least not hostile to gays posting on the Gay Patriot?
Yes. In my view, individual acts of discrimination by businesses are a lesser evil than judicial tyranny. That is my view, but it is not the view of the conservative mainstream.
Wow, thanks for the shocking but honest answer V the K. Your answer sounds principled, so I was surprised when I clicked on your link and got sent to a site that mocks gays as reprobates. Why do you come to a blog called the Gay Patriot? Do you know something about the real motivation of the blog’s founding that I don’t? I’m just starting to catch on to the tongue-in-cheek joke that is the name Gay Patriot, I guess.
I literally just came over from Jerry Pournelle’s site to here, and what he had to say about California is relevant.
Food for thought.
Interesting that you see a skinny guy with his pants down next to a car and automatically assume he’s gay. Now who’s the bigot?
1. Mike loved his car, but he was too drunk to find the gas hole.
2. During his summers off, Harry Potter liked to put on the Invisibility Cloak and cruise rest areas.
3. Dude, it’s not SURPRISE BUTTSECKS if you are anticipating it.
4. Jerome never once got a ticket while driving through Massachusetts.
5. “No one’s ever gonna see these pictures but us, right Mr. Favre?”
One other thing, did you ever stop and think maybe the reason some gay kids commit suicide is because lefties like you tell them they have nothing to look forward to in life but hate and victimhood? Or, maybe because they look at a lifestyle that celebrates drag queens, drug abuse, promiscuous sex, hatred of religion, and generally obnoxious behavior and just can’t bear the thought that it is the only possible future for them? V the K
Must be that V worships with Clint McCance
Gene – indeed, it is great that people are free to move from state to state. But be wary of transplants from California that bring their politics with them.
I can’t friggin believe that you – they – elected Governor Moonbeam and reelected Senator Dimwit. The state is collapsing and they voted for more of it.
But why should I be surprised? Across the river in Washington DC they threw out the reformer Adrian Fenty and replace him with teacher-union approved Vincent Gray.
I am so glad I live in Virginia.
“Gay Patriot” sounds like it would be pro-gay. But, from B. Daniel Blatt’s post that gay couples can never make a real marriage (this from the main writer/editor) and praise elsewhere for the “reparative therapy” rip-off denounced by every medical association in the world not on the payroll of an ideological group. This is obviously a Right-wing front, bought and paid for, having nothing to do with gays except to attack them.
V the K titles a photo with the word “Reprobate” a code word only used by the most extreme rightwingers to attack gays. Admit it; you are on a website calling gay people names and linking us to your nasty anti-gay garbage.
You spend all your time on a gay website while allegedly disapproving of gay people; I guess that puts you in the company of George Rekers who rails against us while renting our young men, and I’m sure you have a wide stance like Larry Craig, Ted Haggard and so many more of your kind. You are obsessed with gays because you are one and you hate yourself for it, which is why you attack others who are gay.
I read today (forgot where) that while most of America disapproves of Obama’s job performance (nine point margin), Californians approve by a ten point margin.
So a state with high unemployment (close to 40 percent in some areas – Central Valley and Imperial County) and a crushing deficit votes for more of the same.
Note to Congress: when California shows up to beg for a bailout, just say no.
Do Californians outside of LA and the Bay area wish they could cut these two areas adrift?
I guess I should change my moniker to reflect my return to Kansas (just in time, it looks like).
equality4all : Reparative therapy? Endorsed by the creators of this site?
I’ve been reading for several years and I can’t remember that… can you cite an instance? I’m getting old and forgetful but I’m sure I’d remember that.
Of course I find VtK’s Caption hilarious – but that’s just me.
Kevin – your thoughts???
The big bankers are planning once again to return to Mr. Obama’s side for 2012. Maybe not to the same degree as in 2008, when Goldman Sachs employees gave more donations to the Obama campaign than any other organization except the University of California. But enough to give the president a decent advantage in his bid for re-election.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303362404575580564099427490.html
(Sorry for serial posting)
“But be wary of transplants from California that bring their politics with them. ”
Tell me about it, Robert. As an underemployed Oregonian, I’m can’t wait to experience way more than my share of California’s collateral damage. It won’t be a new experience, just a change of degree, since Californians have been coming here for years and so many of them complain about how crazy expensive California is while simultaneously voting in every tax increasing politician and ballot measure put in front of them.
Not just that, but now that it looks like Kitzhaber is likely to win and be reelected as governor, Blatt, if he changed the names and numbers, could practically write this same article about Oregon. Our public pension problem probably isn’t as bad, but too many of us are certainly drinking the same Green-Jobs-Will-Solve-Everything Kool-Aid.
Yes, because 60-plus seats in the House, six Senate seats, 16 state legislatures flipping, and numerous governorships is such a minor victory.
Consider this, Kevin; your Obama Party “mandate” for BOTH 2006 and 2008 didn’t add up to that. Not even close.
But of course, we don’t expect intelligence from an Obama Party LGBT individual like yourself. You are only capable of repeating talking points, not really providing any degree of intellectual analysis or thought.
Thank you, SCR. Compliments from friends are almost as gratifying as hissy fits from the other side.
Liberals quite often are intellectually wanting. This is clearly an example.
Incidentally and ironically, this is the same Supreme Court that had earlier decided Loving v. Virginia, making it quite clear that said decision established no precedent whatsoever for the delusion of liberal gays and lesbians that gender is irrelevant or meaningless.
equality4all said, “This is obviously a Right-wing front, bought and paid for, having nothing to do with gays except to attack them.”
Maybe you are on to something. All along, I’ve just been thinking that the alleged gays on this website were afflicted with Stockholm Syndrome.
And as for “equality4all”, we should remember that it supports and endorses those who seek to foster and adopt children for the purposes of molesting them and selling them for sex, as well as those who sexually harass their coworkers and claim that punishing them for doing so is “homophobia and sexism”.
Clearly “gay rights” is nothing more than a front argument for pedophiles and perverts like “equality4all” to have the government not only shield their need to rape and molest, but to actually subsidize it.
#36: “I guess that puts you in the company of George Rekers who rails against us while renting our young men, and I’m sure you have a wide stance like Larry Craig, Ted Haggard and so many more of your kind. You are obsessed with gays because you are one and you hate yourself for it, which is why you attack others who are gay.”
I love it. equality4all posts 20 comments shrieking about how he’s been misjudged, words put in his mouth, presumed to be what he’s not, blah, blah, blah,…
Meanwhile, the true conservatives that frequent this site (gay and straight) have been silently running a countdown clock until equality4all busted out the “Larry Craig,” “Ted Haggard,” and/or “self-hating” cards that we’ve NEEEEEEEVER seen before. Yeah, equality4all, we had you ALL WRONG. You’re a true original.
See, equality4all, we understand you completely. There is NOTHING unique about your worldview or the comments you’ve made on this site. In contrast, you have made absolutely no effort to understand what conservatives truly believe, particularly gay conservatives. Here’s a hint: we are not “self-hating” and nothing about our beliefs or the way we live our lives supports such a conclusion. “Self-hating” is an expression better applied to gay people who spend their lives desperately seeking the validation and approval of government, politicians, and non-profit groups who presume to speak for all of us.
While I have read your blog for some time and find it interesting, I rarely post. Your comments about California’s governmental and budgetary problems seem to look on the surface. I wonder how many of you actually live in California, have a business (small or large) of your own, and, most importantly, understand the State’s history. The condescension is typical of those who like to see the “Hollywood” side and not the deeper issues. If one was alive to have seen Prop. 13 pass, then one recalls the demographic that voted for this legislation. I will not lay blame for the fiscal difficulties of the State completely on Prop. 13- that is too facile. Yet one must understand how much 13 disrupted the prior decades of revenue allocations which were hammered out by the Assembly and Senate. Moreover, one might consider how each Governor from Edmund Brown on has affected the Budget. For those who disparage Jerry Brown, try to recall that he left a surplus for the State after some less than salutary decisions by Gov. Reagan. George Deukmjian squandered that surplus, and left Pete Wilson to pick up the empty bag. Wilson did the best he could, but the voters never saw a bond issue they didn’t like. And you have to pay that interest with current income, which was declining in the face of earmarks for Schools, Police, and Firefighters Unions- because Everybody loves these groups. The solutions are not as simple as putting a Fortune 500 CEO in power as if delegation from the Boardroom passes for comprehending what a small business owner decides on a daily basis. I have two companies, and, while California remains a tough market because of competition, yet its regulatory environment is not as onerous as some of you like to decry. Of course, I realize internet blogs are hardly the place for legislative deliberation.
Bryan, I live here in California. You’re spinning Brown’s record. Reagan left the state in sound fiscal shape.
If Prop 13 is such a problem, how did Pete Wilson do such a good job keeping the state’s finances in order while operating under this law for all eight years of his tenure?
Granted some starts have worse regulatory environments, but ours are certainly pretty onerous. And even with Prop 13, we have the third highest state tax burden and rank 49th in a list of the 50 states business tax climate.
If think I’m making this up, I can gladly provide links.
Meg Whitman lost. The issue here is Jerry Brown. What solutions does he have to the state’s fiscal woes? What plans does he have to make the state more friendly to job-creating businesses?
Bryan ( if that is your name) I have never read any thing more full of BS. Yes, I voted for prop 13 and I still enjoy a decent property tax account of it. Also I remember when Reagan left office, he left over a BILLION dollars in the state treasury. Brown left the state in debt. That I remember.
so, John W, if Brown takes over a government in surplus and leave it in debt, what then will he do when he takes over a government in debt, leave it in surplus?
🙂
Good question.
#47: “For those who disparage Jerry Brown, try to recall that he left a surplus for the State after some less than salutary decisions by Gov. Reagan.”
Are you kidding? Is this a joke? Any defense of Jerry Brown’s past fiscal record as the Governor of California is absurd in light of the fact that he signed The Dills Act into law, authorizing public employees to form unions and engage in collective bargaining. The very idea that public employees needed to unionize in order to protect their interests against “management” and that their employers (State of California bureaucrats) had a tangible, vested interest in effectively protecting the taxpayers from excessive union demands for compensation and benefits is LUDICROUS. The obscenely lavish retiree/health/pension payouts that California taxpayers are on the hook for today are Brown’s disgusting legacy and if Whitman had hammered him for it, she might be California’s Governor today.
Less than salutary decisions by Governor Reagan? Can you name any of those “less than salutary decisions” that are currently threatening to bankrupt the State today, three decades later? The words “Jerry Brown” and “surplus” belong on separate continents.
Daniel, John, and Sean:
Thanks kindly for your enjoyable remarks. Apparently I hit some sore points, though I merely intended to comment constructively.
John, curious as to why you’d even question my name. Nonetheless, I am glad your property is taxed at its current rate. I grew up in a part of SoCal known for its expensive real estate, and saw firsthand the results of Prop. 13 on my neighbors and friends. I never blamed the change from ad-valorem to acquisitions-based assessment nor the amount of the rate itself on California’s financial woes. I pointed out that the Proposition shifted the allocation of monies completely to Sacramento, which heretofore had been granted to counties and municipalities. This transfer overturned the prior budgetary assumptions of those entities since they could no longer expect to be on the receiving end of tax revenues. I have no issue with the Supreme Court case that declared unconstitutional the allocation of property taxes for schools. Yet Prop. 13 ended up impoverishing the local level at the expense of the central government (hardly a conservative tenet). Consequently cities and municipalities had to look for fees and assessments to cover their own budgets and services. Judging from the locations where I have real estate, I can tally the all-in rate for these fees, assessments, and other service charges, and conclude that the 1% property assessment is a chimera if not for these other revenue-generating schemes. I am not persuaded that this re-allocation where Sacramento controls the purse is a healthy fiscal policy.
And, as we know, California depends disproportionately on income taxes for revenue (more than 50% if I recall). This situation is contrasted with a rule of thumb for public finance, as well as the experience of other states, that a rough one-third of revenues come from sales tax, property tax, and income tax, and the balance from fees. Hence one now sees special assessments for all sorts of things…and continuing feast-or-famine crises.
Sean, I had to look up the Dills Act, since I know it by SEERA. Ah yes, Ralph Dills, a LONG-standing California politician. Sure, Jerry signed it though I don’t recall there was any particular fanfare from him, though certainly from State Sen. Dills as it was his crowning achievement. I do feel it important to place legislation in its historical period. Pres. Kennedy signed collective bargaining and unionization for Federal workers in 1961. And Gov. Reagan did so for California city and municipal workers in his first term (as I recall). So this issue was certainly a cross-partisan one. I cannot blame Jerry Brown for the present mess of the CalPERS and SEIU. Actually, if one really needs to point fingers, Gray Davis signed SB400 in 1999 thereby giving immensely favorable benefits to state employees. Moreover, during 1992-93 in order to address the underfunding of the CalPERS Pension, Pete Wilson endorsed and put into place an accounting method whereby the ROI used was putatively higher than might prudently be assumed for given market conditions. Wilson also attempted to replace the statutory Pension Board with political appointees. As was the situtation in Orange County, the State ignored three main and ill-advised investment choices: riskier and more concentrated portfolio holdings, use of unrealistic ROI assumptions thus waving away the need for continuing contributions, and the runaway permission for each separate employee group to clamor for its own benefits. It is easy in hindsight to see cause and effect, but Jerry Brown is not directly the cause of State Pension underfunding.
Fine and dandy about who left a deficit and who, a surplus. Jerry used the $5 billion to cover serious shortfalls resulting from Prop. 13. For that action, even Howard Jarvis praised him ( and did some TV spot before his second term election, I remember). Of course, his using that $5 billion served only to delay the pain because the deficit Jerry left for Deukmejian resulted from Prop. 13’s re-allocations and shortfalls. As I recall, even Jerry vetoed the state employees’ request for increased wages and benefits in his second term, and, when the Legislature approved and sent it back to him, he vetoed the bill again. Yet the Legislature finally overrode his veto. In the face of California’s well-organized Senate and Assembly, a governor can do only so much- as Ronald Reagan discovered when he found he had to work with the Legislature to make cuts and increase taxes in his first term. Just as Pete Wilson found he had to work with Willie Brown to get his budget passed. It would be ridiculously simplistic to say that in California Republican governors inherit the deficits of their Democratic predecessors.
Sean, as I don’t believe Jerry Brown was by himself responsible for California’s State Pension and Tax Revenue woes. As for Gov. Reagan, his polices were far more centrist than his off-putting rhetoric would lead one to believe when he was in Sacramento. Yet he was forced to mediate because he himself oversaw budgetary problems and tax increases and cutbacks. I see three areas which tarnish his legacy as governor: one, Reagan spoke of “welfare bums”, a term he later conflated into “welfare queens”; and, two, the LPS Act of 1967; and, three, his signing of a bill allowing abortion in 1967. His usage towards welfare recipents had at the time a strongly racial overtones, specifically anti-black ones. Reagan was somewhat tone-deaf when he and his advisors spoke on social issues. These regrettable terms have seen their end in some politicians in the GOP using race negatively. In the Conservative Movement, Ronnie Reagan went where Barry Goldwater would not.
Second, the LPS Act was hailed on behalf of the incarcerated mentally ill as a new paradigm for their humane treatment and their rights as a patient. The intention was good, the execution was bad. Reagan signed the bill with its mandated reductions in patient levels in state hospitals. Federal funds were to cover the State cuts, and former state wards were to be cared for on an out-patient basis. Unfortunately, Gov. Reagan also cut the state funds which were to assist counties and cities with out-patient care, as well as continued to close state hospitals. I remember the sudden increase in street homelessness during the 1970’s and 80’s when I was in all three of California major cities. I’m sure you will say that Reagan was not to blame (even though Jerry was to blame on account of the Dills Act). Yet, since he failed to fund the necessary clinics, and the Fed funds dried up, I find it hard to excuse the oversight. While one enjoyed greatly spending time with him, his curious failure to empathize is a detraction. In the end, it’s not mere fiscal leadership but also social leadership that tells the human being.
As for abortion, well, he signed. Even though he said he wouldn’t have if he hadn’t been such a new governor. Well, there you go again. Reagan was plagued by an unseemly passivity despite his reputation as a strong-willed leader. And we know Who is in the details.
Daniel, as the Bard said, Past is Prologue. Look at what Jerry did, and didn’t do, in Oakland. Consider his full record as governor and his proposals and warnings in office and as a presidential candidate. He has offered some changes to CalPERS, not all favorable to the unions. To make California more friendly to business, check out his deeds as Mayor. My Oakland friends say he learned a lot while he was there (maybe more for him than for Oakland, some say). And I don’t recall that Jerry ever had a corporate jet. Though he did have a Plymouth. And his mother was a lovely and gracious lady.
Bryan, thank you for your detailed response. I wasn’t in CA when Brown was governor, but do recall that he did live frugally, eschewing some of the perks of the office.
Perhaps, he will stand up to the legislature as he did in the 1970s. But did the public employee unions back then bankroll his campaign? I don’t know it, but doubt it, given that they then lacked the resources they would later acquire as the Dills Act took effect — not to mention some reforms enacted in 1999 by Brown’s understudy Gray Davis.
As to the increased homelessness, it was largely related to a Carter-era decision (not sure if it was Carter himself who made it and am too tried to look it up) to remove certain mentally ill individuals who had been institutionalized.
And Jerry Brown is just weird. In this post, I don’t mention the state’s $19 billion-dollar deficit. The state is on the brink of a fiscal crisis. And this is Jerry Brown’s victory speech–http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D06LzFgj__o.
If he were serious about ending polarization, as he said in the address, he would have offered a kind word for his opponent, praising her, say, for her spirited campaign and her commitment to mending California’s problems. Then, he could add, we both know that California faces many challenges and I am humbled that its citizens chose me to fix them.
But, he talked about transforming the world when first he needs fix the state he once governed.
I grant that the Gipper was far from perfect, but, in 1975, he did leave Brown a state in solid fiscal shape. The issue here is not Ronald Reagan, but Jerry Brown. And whether he’s up to the task ahead of him.
He has so far given little indication he’s aware of the severity of the problem. And his victory speech gives more cause for concern.
Daniel:
Thank you kindly for enduring my post, and I will not blather on.
Yes, Jerry’s weird. Anyone who was a Jesuit, lived in a Japanese Zen monastery, dated Linda Ronstadt, and drove a Plymouth…is not your garden-variety politician. Still, as a California native, I know weird is what our State is, and I’ve lived many places in the world to know I like weird. Yes, Jerry should have been the gentleman and offered thanks to Meg (so he’s not his mother). He needs to speak to the Fiscal Crisis. California’s has had so many Fiscal Crises we all probably think it’s normal (like weird LOL). Best of luck to him…but make sure your own accountant is good at tax time.
Bryan, It is getting way past bed time for this old man but there is one point that I want to make. There are lots and lots of elderly people who are happyly living in their own homes which they lived in for ages, who could not afford the tax if not for prop 13. Yes, I realize how despot the State is for money. My daughter is a school superintend and I don’t know how many employees that she had to lay off this year account of no money.
There are other items in your comments that I disagree with but we will skip it this time.