The Airbrush Of Human Beings From The California Budget Crisis

Peter Schrag is one of the few columnists left in this state who consistently makes sense, and today he attacks that silly NYTimes article about California, in particular the elements of conventional wisdom:

In his passing references to California’s serious issues, many of which have major implications for the nation as a whole, Leibovich collects pieces of the conventional wisdom, even when, as in his facile summary of the causes of gridlock in Sacramento, it’s wrong. Since Democrats have again and again agreed to multi-billion dollar cuts, it is not, as he thinks, just a matter of “‘no more taxes’ (Republicans) and ‘no more cuts’ (Democrats).”

And while Jerry Brown, in his prior tenure as governor was indeed labeled “Governor Moonbeam” (by a Chicago columnist) for his space proposals, as Leibovich says, the label applied much more broadly to his inattention to the daily duties of his office and, most particularly to his dithering while the forces that produced Proposition 13 began to roll.

Brown later acknowledged that he didn’t have the attention span to focus on the property tax reforms that were then so urgently needed to avert the revolt of 1978. But to this day, almost no one has said much of Brown’s role in creating the anti-government climate and resentments that helped fuel the Proposition 13 drive.

It was the Brown, echoing much of the 1970s counter-culture, who, as much as anyone, was poor-mouthing the schools and universities as failing their students and who threatened to cut their funding if they didn’t shape up. It is Brown who spent most of his political career savaging politics and politicians, even as he ran for yet another office. Now this is the guy who wants to be governor again. But Leibovich doesn’t tell his readers that long history. Maybe he doesn’t know it.

The line about how those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it can be inserted here.  But Schrag hits on the most important failing of the article, and indeed of a good chunk of the political media here in California – they airbrush out the people who suffer for the failures of the politicians.

Where are California and the people who are feeling the pain – the school kids and teachers in hopelessly underfunded schools, the children who are losing their health care, the minimum-wage working mothers struggling to pay their child care, the students who are losing their university grants? Is all this really about nothing?

To far too many, the answer is yes.  It’s politics as theater, as a sporting event, where winners and losers are checked on a board, and whether or not a leader will keep their position is made the story rather than the principles he or she represents.  And yet it’s not Governor Hot Tubs and Stogies who will feel the pain of an economic downturn and massive budget cuts, nor well-heeled consultants or columnists who make up the scorecards.  It’s people.

People like the students in the Cal State system who may see their fees raised 20%, just months after a 10% hike approved in May.  This will effectively block higher education for a non-trivial number of students, as will proposed enrollment reductions of 32,000 students.

People like LA County homeowners who have defaulted at twice the rate in May as they have in the previous month, as a foreclosure backlog builds up due to various moratoriums and an increase in repossessed homes entering the market.

People like IOU holders who may have to turn to check-cashing stores to get less-than-full value for their registered warrants after Friday, when most major banks (who have all been bailed out by the federal government, by the way) stop the exchange of the notes.

And people like the elderly, disabled and blind, who rely on the in-home support services that the Governor is trying to illegally cut in contravention of a contempt-of-court citation, at least in Fresno.

These are the great unmentioned in this California crisis, the people who Dan Walters tries to smear in his column today by turning every Democratic concern for the impacts of policy as a sellout to “public employee unions.”  Behind those unions are workers, and the people they serve need the help the provide, in many cases, simply to survive.  But it would be too dangerous to Walters’ beautiful mind to consider those faces, so he chooses to make political hay out of the violation of people.

This is the point of the People’s Day of Reckoning Coalition.  They refuse to have their existence denied any longer.

…THE Jerry Brown commented in Schrag’s post:

Mr. Schrag’s latest screed is a good example of why politics in Sacramento is so dis-functional. Instead of trying to find the truth in the Leibovich article, he mocks both the writer and each of the subjects. In recent years, Schrag has become increasingly bitter. That’s very sad because he once was an open-minded person with real insight into the predicaments of modern society. Finally, his memory is not serving him well regarding Propistion 13 and the factors that constituted the ethos of that period. In fact, there was a long and hard fought battle to get property tax relief that got all the way to the state Senate but foundered just short of the necessary two thirds vote. There is much to say about government, schools and taxation in California. But to get anywhere it requires a degree of empathy and engagement with opposing perspectives that no longer seems congenial to Mr. Schrag.

Posted by: Jerry Brown at July 8, 2009 08:41 AM

Wow.

12 thoughts on “The Airbrush Of Human Beings From The California Budget Crisis”

  1. The one about the extortionate fee hikes.

    All I can say is… I’m lucky I got admitted to return to a CSU campus when I did.

  2. Having his little geezer spat over who’s got the better memory, him or Schrag. Who’s bitterer. Jeebus. Who’s the more pathetic?

    Don’t get me started on Jerry Brown.

    The fact that Shrag actually acknowledges those who are paying the real price for current dithering and gridlock under the Capitol dome — they’re paying it now, and they’re gonna pay a lot more no matter how the impasse is resolved — seems to be something you just don’t do if you want to be taken seriously.

    “They” — those undeserving poor and disabled and frail elderly — are just supposed to suck it up so their Betters can play their political power games to their hearts’ content. Smoke their stogies. Barricade themselves behind their walls and gates and private armies.  

  3. Schrag’s article, or at least the part posted here, seems not focused so much on the budget issue — which is where our attention should be focused right now — but at serving an opening salvo in the Newsom-Brown race.

    I have no idea what David’s “Wow” following Brown’s reply is supposed to convey.  Is it “what temerity on Brown’s part!” or “what an ass-smacking that was!” or something else?  I can say this: Brown is making a factual assertion there, something that people can check out.  Was there such a vote, that only narrowly failed to reach 2/3?  If so, then not only Schrag, but people here who have been saying that Brown is the one responsible for Prop 13’s passage owe him an apology.

    My recollection is that Brown did goad educators to better productivity and effectiveness during the first 3-1/2 years of his term, but that some of the bothersome things that I recall, such as his saying that professors didn’t need their pay raises because their jobs had such high satisfactions, came after Prop 13 tied his hands.  (And it surely did that.)

    The “Governor Moonbeam” name stuck to Brown because he was as close as the ’70s counterculture had to a representative in office.  It was an “anti-hippie” name, very similar in tone to the current appellation “moonbat” used against the Left.

    Brown is sometimes prone to loose talk, so even if Schrag can find a link to Brown not having “the attention span” to deal with property tax release — which sounds like a crock, but to be fair may have some nut of truth in some overly self-deprecating comment of Brown’s — I highly doubt that this characterization fits with what Brown describes above.

    This part quoted above:

    It was the Brown, echoing much of the 1970s counter-culture, who, as much as anyone, was poor-mouthing the schools and universities as failing their students and who threatened to cut their funding if they didn’t shape up. It is Brown who spent most of his political career savaging politics and politicians, even as he ran for yet another office. Now this is the guy who wants to be governor again. But Leibovich doesn’t tell his readers that long history. Maybe he doesn’t know it.

    looks like pure hatchet job — and, worse, it is a hatchet job against the counterculture that Calitics editors damn well would have called their political home in the day.  Has Brown savaged politics and politicians?  Sure — and that inclines some Calitics participants against him?

    Are we really going to be treated to eleven months of people resurrecting the right-wing memes from the 1970s to support Newsom?  I would not have believed it.

    According to Google, the term “Brown Derangement Syndrone” has been used (in reference to Jerry Brown) exactly once on the Internet — by consultant Bill Bradley in a 2007 comment  that characterizes some right-wingers’ attitudes towards the Gov.  Too bad for me, because after reading Schrag’s piece and the comment above mine, I was ready to coin it.

    I’d love not to have to get deep into the Governor’s race right now given the real problems we all agree we face.  Can we all agree to a truce, that we are not going to use this budget crisis to score political points in the Gov’s primary?  That goes for you too, Mr. Schrag.

Comments are closed.