All posts by Brian Leubitz

The Strange Coalitions on Brown’s revenue measures

While Brown works to cobble together a centrist coalition, the corpse of Howard Jarvis speaks.

by Brian Leubitz

Jerry Brown is putting together quite the interesting coalition for his tax revenue measure.  He’s got some labor support, of course, but he’s been claiming support from some large companies that usually go by “Big” and followed by the name of some industry. He’s got some Big Oil, some Big Healthcare, yada, yada.

Hearing this, the corpse of Howard Jarvis was none too pleased. So, they’ve gone ahead and begged their Big Business friends to resist Jerry Brown’s “cajoling.”

“We know that Governor Brown, just through the power of his office alone, can cajole and perhaps even threaten vulnerable businesses,” the groups said in an open letter. “It is therefore not lost on us that, under certain circumstances, modest support to help the governor place his measure on the ballot might be viewed a lesser of two evils or, more likely, as an insurance payment. However, on behalf of citizen taxpayers and the small business community, we appeal to your sense of doing what is right for all of California.” (SacBee)

This really is quite remarkable. Though HJTA didn’t exactly get along with Gov. Schwarzenegger, they never really went this far with him.  By this far, I mean insinuating that Brown is threatening companies in order to solicit funding for his revenue measure.  Not that Arnold ever did that, because, special interests had no power on him.  He could resist them with his massive musculature.  Until he couldn’t.

But this is more a sign of desperation than anything else.  If Brown is able to pull significant resources and support from some of the traditional funders of anti-tax campaign, it will be an exceedingly difficult fall campaign for HJTA and its allies.  Because you know you are doing well when you try to quote Benjamin Franklin about hanging together or hanging separately. (I say try because it is quite possible that Franklin didn’t actually come up with the phrase.) The quote is even more out of touch considering the desperate state of many of Californians most needy who have been devastated by the continuous cuts to services.

Kamala Harris Rejects 50-State Settlement From Banks

Attorney General says deal is inadequate

by Brian Leubitz

Kamala Harris, whom I had the great privilege of helping to get elected, has been a leader on mortgage fraud since her SF DA days.  She’s continued that as California AG, and now she’s showing just how important the closest California statewide election really was.  The CA DoJ recently announced that the proposed nationwide settlement for the systemic mortgage fraud by the big banks was inadequate for Californians:

“We’ve reviewed the details of the latest settlement proposal from the banks, and we believe it is inadequate for California,” Shum Preston, a spokesman for Harris, said in a statement. “Our state has been clear about what any multistate settlement must contain: transparency, relief going to the most distressed homeowners and meaningful enforcement that ensures accountability.  At this point, this deal does not suffice for California.”

While California isn’t totally alone on this settlement, NY AG Eric Schneiderman has also shared some misgivings about signing on to anything that wouldn’t allow him to fully pursue his investigations of the widespread fraud in the mortgage system during the bubble. For just some of the background on this story, see the 60 Minutes story embedded. The extent of the fraud has never really been uncovered.  

The President, the banks, and many state AGs are looking to bring this to a close. However, AG Harris has declared that punishing those that committed the fraud and getting the best deal for Californians is her priority rather than simply getting a quick deal.

PPIC Poll Shows Large Information Gap

California voters are against cuts, mixed on taxes.

by Brian Leubitz

When the Republican realized that they could make some electoral gains from becoming the “Second Santa”with their tax cuts, they knew they were on to something.  They didn’t have to be the bad guys promoting spending cuts, and their tax cuts would somehow net just as much revenue because the magic “Laffer curve” would make everything better. And if it didn’t work, well, the Democrats would have to cut spending and do the dirty work.

And, unsurprisingly, it worked. It has clearly worked in California, where Prop 13 and its anti-tax brethren have wreaked havoc on the state.  For a few decades we were able to hide much of this through some huge bubbles and creative accounting, but that is a thing of the past.  And so we have a huge deficit, a dysfunctional tax system, and a government that only allows cuts. What’s a Republican to do to keep up his role as a second santa?

Well, blame it all on “waste, fraud, and abuse.”  It’s a simple lie that, when repeated enough, becomes mantra to the media and, eventually, the general public.  Take the latest PPIC poll and the latest finding:

Most Californians (59% adults, 55% likely voters) believe state government could cut spending and still provide the same level of services.

“There remains a strong belief that the state government could spend less and provide the same services even as Californians notice local service reductions from state spending cuts and show early support for a tax increase,” says Mark Baldassare, PPIC president and CEO. (PPIC)

When the budget first got bad a few years back, perhaps there was a bit of fat to trim around the budget. Some unnecessary expenditures here and an unsuccessful program there. Not enough to fix the budget, but a few billion could be saved without fundamentally changing the role of government.

Those days are gone. Cuts to government expenditures mean direct cuts to services. There is simply no way to provide the same level of services for an ever decreasing amount of money. Go take a look at your local government offices and then compare it to the offices of your local bank corporate office.  There are no fancy waterfalls and lavish breakrooms offering wide selections of Odwalla and Rice Krispies, there are just a dwindling level of state employees working ever harder to keep up.  Teachers are spending large chunks of their paychecks to provide supplies for their classrooms and their students. Cuts to CalFire put firefighters in very real danger and mean more damage to California homes.

And yet, a strong majority of Californians are living in a world where we can somehow make painless cuts? Do they know of any of these painless cuts? Do the Republicans? Have they ever presented any of these so-called painless cuts?

But while 40 percent of adults and likely voters prefer closing the state’s budget gap with a mix of spending cuts and tax increases-the approach Brown has proposed-similar proportions (35% adults, 41% likely voters) prefer closing it mainly through spending cuts. That being said, when read a summary, 72 percent of adults and 68 percent of likely voters favor Brown’s initiative proposal.

Interestingly, the PPIC data also shows much stronger support for raising the highest income tax bracket(74% adults, 68% likely voters) than the sales tax. The sales tax is opposed by 69% of adults, 64% of likely voters. That particular question raises the specter of competing tax measures, the “Kardashian” tax and Brown’s own measure. There is still a lot of time before signatures are due, and Brown has been working to shut down any other revenue measure. Whether he is successful or not will still take a while to know, but may end up dramatically changing the odds of his own measure.

While there have been efforts at public education on the budget by state politicians, it is a monstrous task, especially when there are players on the other side actively promoting misinformation.  But, at every opportunity, progressives must be sure to emphasize the point that waste, fraud, and abuse is not an answer to all of our budget woes and to explain the real budget situation.

The Democratic Endorsement and the Grassroots

Democratic endorsement process has a strange relationship with the grassroots

by Brian Leubitz

The pre-convention caucuses are one of the most grassroots friendly processes in California politics, while at the same time, there is a potential to game them from above.  Last weekend, a number of competitive races, especially in Southern California where redistricting tossed a number of districts into chaos.

Around the Capitol has a great district by district listing of the competitive races and the CDP has a PDF of all the races, but the dynamic is worth focusing on.  As John Myers points out, in a Top-2 world, these could make a bigger difference than in the past:

For casual political watchers, it may be hard to believe that small gatherings of diehard Democrats in January will decide who wins races for the Legislature or Congress come November. And yet, in some cases, that’s exactly what could happen after this weekend. Welcome to the world of intraparty competition under California’s new primary election rules. (KQED Capitol Notes)

Typically, the value of the CDP’s endorsement is limited.  You get to ask the party to work with you on mailers, and use their lower mail rate, which can save a few dollars.  (It’s like a coupon!) And the party can spend money on your race. But, traditionally, the party itself will likely spend very little, if any, on the endorsed candidates in the primary.  But with Top-2, the word “primary” is something of a sketchy term, and candidates are labeled only as preferring one party or another.  So, the state party’s imprimatur could mean something more this cycle. The biggest thing is that this year, the sample ballot will include a listing of the endorsed candidate.

Since John Myers referred to the IKEA-instruction-like voting eligibility, I figured I would explain that as a way of explaining how thinks like Torie Osborn winning every Dem club endorsement but losing the Dem party happens.  To that specific district, AD-50, it seems clear that Torie Osborn, a progressive grassroots rock star and organizer for the California Alliance, has the support of the grassroots Democrats.  But Butler is getting support from the Assembly Democratic caucus.  Why does that matter, you ask?

Well, here is how the voting eligibility works for the pre-convention caucus:

  1. Democratic clubs get one vote for every 20 verified active members in the district.
  2. Democratic County Central Committee members in the district get a vote.
  3. Democratic State Central Committee members in the district get a vote.  But this is where it gets complicated, as there are a number of ways you can become a delegate to the state party.
    • 12 members per assembly district elected in January of every odd year.
    • Members appointed by the county central committee
    • Members appointed by legislators and executive office holders.

The last two is where it gets really dicey.  The County chair usually appoints all of the central committee members to be delegates and in a county with an abundance of Democrats like LA, will have some left over. Those that are left over can be moved around into a district of need for endorsement. I don’t know if that happened with LA County chairman Eric Bauman or not.  (UPDATE: Most counties, including LA, elect their additional delegates, so it wouldn’t really be possible to game the system this way.)

The bigger target of delegate movement is the legislators.  Legislators can appoint half of their delegation outside of their own district, and those appointees get to vote in their own districts. Speaker John Perez has been pretty vocal in encouraging Ms. Osborn to “wait her turn” until Ms. Butler is termed out.  The problem with that is that she had been waiting her turn for Asm. Mike Feuer to term out in 2012.  Butler’s district barely touched this new AD-50, in fact she represents less than 10% (CORRECTION: Less than 2%) of the new AD-50 now.  However, as Butler decided not to run for the now more Republican friendly district that encompasses much of her new district, Osborn is now being told to wait again by the Assembly caucus.  Except she is not waiting, and has continued to run her campaign.

As a result, Speaker Perez has been organizing a dump of delegates into the new district, tilting the balance from Osborn to Butler.  At the convention, where the Democratic club members do not get to participate, this tilt of power towards legislators becomes more pronounced.  If Butler is able to get 2/3 of the delegates in her column, the only way to remove the endorsement from the consent calendar is to get 2 members from the Pre-primary endorsement review panel (PERC) to agree to pull it off the consent calender for PERC review.  If less than 2/3 support Butler, Osborn supporters will be able to gather 300 signatures to bring the endorsement to the floor.

(UPDATE: Note that the PERC consists of all DSCC executive board members in the district as well as the regional director, two e-board members appointed by the Chair and the state officers)

This process can happen in a few more districts around the state that are marked “caucus” on the PDF of all the races.  If you are coming to San Diego, keep an eye out on that 2/3 threshhold in the district level caucuses.

Sanders and Villaraigosa Featured in Mayors for Equality Video

Mayors officially Announce “Mayors for Marriage” campaign

Last week I mentioned that Jerry Sanders and Antonio Villaraigosa had teamed up with other mayors across the nation to launch an effort to back marriage equality. Freedom to marry has now officially launched the video from that US Conference of Mayors meeting last week:

You can see the full list of mayors that signed up for the campaign include many California mayors, from some of our biggest cities, LA, SD, Oakland and SF and a whole of assortment of interesting names (Redondo Beach, Chico, and San Luis Obispo).  

The two biggest cities not on the list are also headed by Democrats as well.  San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed is opposed to marriage equality, though he didn’t publicly endorse Prop 8. Sacramento’s Kevin Johnson who publicly opposed Prop 8, also, at least at last check, was playing the Obama game of not supporting constitutional amendments but opposing marriage equality.

The CDP Endorsement Process Starts Tomorrow

Democrats across the state will meet to begin the first step towards legislative endorsements

by Brian Leubitz

UPDATE: AroundTheCapitol.com is tracking the contested races.  Some of the big news already is that in SD-13 (San Mateo, Jerry Hill/Sally Lieber), there was no consensus, so there will be no official endorsement.  Also, no endorsement in AD-8.

The same is the Democrats across the state will meet at pre-convention caucuses across the state to begin the somewhat complicated process of endorsing for assembly, senate and congressional seats.  (Note: I have a part in this, as I am running the SF-based Region 4 endorsement process)  This might get confusing, but here’s a quick run-down of the process. If you’d like all the details, the CDP has a handy endorsement process memo written for campaigns.

1) Pre-convention: The voting population is made up of all the democratic state central committee (DSCC) members (delegates to the state convention) as well as 1 representative for every 20 members for all chartered democratic clubs in the district. If one candidate gets 70% of the vote in the district, he or she receives the endorsement.  If no candidate receives 50%, there is no endorsement in the race. If a candidate receives between 50 and 70%, the process moves to the convention.

Voters can attend the pre-convention caucus for each of the 21 regions and vote there, or they can mail, email or fax in their ballots to their regional directors.

2) Convention:

The voting population is made up of the DSCC members in the district, club representatives are no longer involved. Incumbents need to receive only 50% of the vote, while non-incumbents need 60%. If the recommendation is less than 2/3 of the vote, the recommendation can be pulled to the convention floor by signatures of 300 members of the DSCC. If the recommendation is by more than 2/3 of the vote, it can only be pulled by the pre-primary endorsement review committee.

3) Floor

If it does get to the floor, the entire DSCC gets to vote on the endorsement. Endorsement requires the same threshold as the convention caucus in part 2.

So there you have it. Fun stuff, huh? Well, if you are at the convention in San Diego in Feburary, you are sure to here more about this process. Until then, if you are a voter, be sure you get your ballot in today!  

SD Mayor Jerry Sanders, Villaraigosa to Lead Marriage Equality Campaign

PhotobucketRepublican Mayor continues fight for Marriage Equality

by Brian Leubitz

Jerry Sanders is really your textbook example case for why the LGBT community needs to come out.  Sanders was going about his business as just another Republican in SoCal, opposed to marriage equality. Hardly a radical anti-gay politician or anything like that, but not somebody that you would call an ally.  That is of course, until his daughter came out as a lesbian.

The change wasn’t overnight, but today, Sanders is now one of the most prominent voices for marriage equality.  He testified at the Prop 8 trial, a day I happened to attend, and it was quite moving. If those tapes are released, his testimony will really be worth a watch.  And today Freedom to Marry announced that Mayor Sanders will be leading a new campaign, creatively called “Mayors for Freedom to Marry.”

Sanders hasn’t suddenly become a progressive, but he has put himself in the shoes of somebody being discriminated against.  He can see that his daughter was hurt by Prop 8, and has done something about it.  I wouldn’t vote for him for most offices, but I do think he should be commended for doing what is best for his family, not for what is best for his ability to win some future Republican “primary” battle.

The committee is co-chaired by Mayor Villaraigosa of LA as well as Mayors Bloomberg (NYC) and Menino (Boston). Meanwhile, the numbers continue to drift towards equality and legislatures across the country are passing marriage bills. At some point in the very near future, this is not going to be an issue outside of the right-wing fringe.

Election Moves

The carousel goes round and round.

by Brian Leubitz

Well, one seat that won’t need to be filled is that of Asm. Warren Furutani, who is still eligible for one more term. He lost his race for LA City Council to LAPD officer Joe Buscaino, and has been drawn in a seat along with Asm. Isadore Hall. Should be an interesting race if he decides to run again.

Meanwhile, Bob Dutton plans on running for CA-31 to replace Jerry Lewis.  Democratic Mayor of Redlands Pete Aguilar is also in that race.  It is a swing district, but Dutton has a ready name advantage.

As expected, Tony Strickland announced that he will be running in CA-26 in what will be heated open race. The seat is a swing district, and should be an interesting race in November with a number of strong Democrats in the running.

In the Senate, Gen. Richard Roth, a former general and a Democrat from Riverside has announced he will run after Riverside Mayor Ron Loveridge denied Senate caucus pleadings to run.

Some Thoughts on the State of the State

Governor thinks big, highlights HSR and education

by Brian Leubitz

You can read the whole State of the State here, and the Bee has a collection of responses here, but there were a few points I thought were worth pulling out.

1) The budget

The Governor’s line was pretty much as expected.  He is planning on making some rather grievous cuts, but feels that we need some revenues to balance out the system.  He promoted his measure and spoke of the temporary nature of the increases.  I would think that temporary is a word that you will be hearing many times as we head to November.

2) HSR

Governor Brown has always been a supporter of HSR, and the recent troubles have done nothing to dissuade him that now is the right time to start building.  The state will be putting up $2B for the first segment, which the Governor calls a good deal no matter what else is built.  However, he went through the old quote book to come up with some good fodder for why we need HSR:

Critics of the high-speed rail project abound as they often do when something of this magnitude is proposed. During the 1930’s, The Central Valley Water Project was called a “fantastic dream” that “will not work.” The Master Plan for the Interstate Highway System in 1939 was derided as “new Deal jitterbug economics.” In 1966, then Mayor Johnson of Berkeley called BART a “billion dollar potential fiasco.” Similarly, the Panama Canal was for years thought to be impractical and Benjamin Disraeli himself said of the Suez Canal: “totally impossible to be carried out.” The critics were wrong then and they’re wrong now.

3) Education

Brown has been something of critic recently of the overabundant testing scheme in place under NCLB. Today was no different:

In California we have detailed state standards and lots of tests. Unfortunately, the resulting data is not provided until after the school year is over. Even today, the ranking of schools based on tests taken in April and May of 2011 is not available. I believe it is time to reduce the number of tests and get the results to teachers, principals and superintendents in weeks, not months. With timely data, principals and superintendents can better mentor and guide teachers as well as make sound evaluations of their performance. I also believe we need a qualitative system of assessments, such as a site visitation program where each classroom is visited, observed and evaluated. I will work with the State Board of Education to develop this proposal.

We’ll see what becomes of this, but reducing testing won’t make the Arne Duncan and the Dept of Education happy. However, it is the right choice for California. We spend too much time teaching to tests in what is becoming an ever-shorter school year.

You’ll be able to watch a replay of the speech soon, I’ll post a link to that when I get it.

State of the State.

Republicans pre-respond, but the basis of today’s speech already seems clear

by Brian Leubitz

UPDATE: Read the text as prepared by the Governor at his website here.

First, let me apologize for not “going dark” today, but since the state of the state is today, I hope the “Stop Censorship” logo on the front page will clearly state my opposition to SOPA/PIPA. Hey, if it works for Google, right?

Anyway, in a few minutes, the Governor will be giving his state of the state speech.  The Republicans have already “responded” to the Speech on the intertubes, but apparently they put those behind a password until the speech to complete the illusion or something.  Not to defend them on this, but to most Capitol watchers, the meat of the speech is not much of a mystery.

The governor will outline how the economy of the state is improving, which it is, but at a rate that has not kept up with the state’s demand for services from an already slashed budget. In order to combat that, he is going to ask the people of California to approve his revenue measure that will temporarily increase the sales tax by half a cent and levy a higher tax on upper income earners.

His budget already takes this measure into account, basically providing two alternatives. One that attempts to preserve K12 funding while still continuing the slash and burn of our social safety net.  The other budget, which assumes no additional revenue, cuts billions of dollars from K12 and would likely mean big teacher layoffs and a still shorter school year.

Dan Schnur and other Republicans are calling this a ransom note from the Governor.  But as Brown said, that’s where the money is. If we don’t have money, we can’t pay for education. The facts are there, we need additional revenue.

But, there is still a speech to be given. You can watch it on CalChannel online or on cable. You can hear the audio on KQED here or KALW here. The SacBee has the stream and live Dan Walters(!) commentary here. I’ll be back with more after the speech.

SACRAMENTO – In his 2012 State of the State speech, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. said California is “on the mend” and laid out an ambitious agenda for economic growth in the year ahead.

The full text of the speech is below: (Remarks as prepared)

As required by the state constitution, I am reporting to you this morning on the condition of our state.

Putting it as simply as I can, California is on the mend. Last year, we were looking at a structural deficit of over $20 billion. It was a real mess. But you rose to the occasion and together we shrunk state government, reduced our borrowing costs and transferred key functions to local government, closer to the people. The result is a problem one fourth as large as the one we confronted last year.

My goal then was to balance budget cuts with a temporary extension of existing taxes-if the voters approved. You made the reductions and some very difficult decisions but the four Republican votes needed to put the tax measure on the ballot were not there. So we are left with unfinished business: closing the remaining gap.

Again, I propose cuts and temporary taxes. Neither is popular but both must be done. In a world still reeling from the near collapse of the financial system, it makes no sense to spend more than we have. The financial downgrading of the United States, as well as of several governments in Europe, should be warning enough. It is said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and digging ourselves into a deep financial hole-to do good-is a bad idea. In this time of uncertainty, prudence and paying down debt is the best policy.

For my part, I am determined to press ahead both with substantial budget cuts and my tax initiative. The cuts are not ones I like but the situation demands them. As for the initiative, it is fair. It is temporary. It is half of what people were paying in 2010.  And it will protect our schools and guarantee-in the constitution-funding for the public safety programs we transferred to local government. With enough time, we can and should devise more permanent tax reform but for now we should finish the job of bringing spending into balance with revenues.

Putting our fiscal house in order is good stewardship and helps us regain the trust of the people. It also builds confidence in California as a place to invest and realize one’s dreams. Contrary to those critics who fantasize that California is a failed state, I see unspent potential and incredible opportunity. Every decade since the 60’s, dystopian journalists write stories on the impending decline of our economy, our culture and our politics. Yes, it is fair to say that California is turbulent, less predictable and, well, different. Yet, look at the facts.

After the mortgage bubble burst in 2007, California lost a million jobs, much of it driven by the overleveraged construction industry and its financial partners in the under-regulated mortgage industry. The result is a recovery far slower than after the previous six national recessions. But now we are coming back. In 2011, California personal income grew by almost $100 billion and 230,000 jobs were created-a rate much higher than the nation as a whole.

Contrary to those declinists, who sing of Texas and bemoan our woes, California is still the land of dreams-as well as the Dream Act. It’s the place where Apple, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Oracle, QUALCOMM, Twitter, Facebook and countless other creative companies all began. It’s home to more Nobel Laureates and venture capital investment than any other state. In 2010, California received 48% of U.S. venture capital investments. In the first three months of last year it rose even higher-to 52%. That is more than four times greater that the next recipient, Massachusetts. As for new patents, California inventors were awarded almost four times as many as inventors from the next state, New York.

California has problems but rumors of its demise are greatly exaggerated.

The year 2012 presents plenty of opportunity and, if we work together, we can:

Stimulate jobs

Build renewable energy

Reduce pollution and greenhouse gasses

Launch the nation’s only high-speed rail system

Reach agreement on a plan to fix the Delta

Improve our schools

Reform our pensions, and,

Make sure that prison realignment is working-to protect public safety and reduce recidivism.

Last year, I appointed a top advisor with an impressive background in the private sector and charged him with finding out what doesn’t work for business in this state and how to fix it. What he heard consistently was that business needed an effective champion to navigate the state’s plethora of complex laws and regulations which can discourage investment and job creation. You enacted a law to restructure our office of business development and place it in the governor’s office. Under the name GO-BIZ, we now have a point of contact at the highest level for businesses large and small. More than that, the GO-BIZ office is staffed with people who understand what it’s like to be in business and stand ready to intervene and give real help to get businesses open and projects off the ground.

Already California is leading the nation in creating jobs in renewable energy and the design and construction of more efficient buildings and new technologies. Our state keeps demanding more efficient structures, cars, machines and electric devices. We do that because we understand that fossil fuels, particularly foreign oil, create ever rising costs to our economy and to our health. It is true that the renewable energy sector is small relative to the overall economy but it pays good wages and will only grow bigger as oil prices increase and the effects of climate change become more obvious and expensive.

I have set a goal of 20,000 megawatts of renewable energy by 2020. You have laid the foundation by adopting the requirement that one third of our electricity come from renewable sources by that date. This morning I can tell you we are on track to meet that goal and substantially exceed it. In the last two years alone, California has permitted over 16,000 megawatts of solar, wind and geothermal energy projects.

In the beginning of the computer industry, jobs were numbered in the thousands. Now they are in the millions. The same thing will happen with green jobs. And California is positioned perfectly to reap the economic benefits that will inevitably flow.

California also leads the nation in cleaning up the air, encouraging electric vehicles and reducing pollution and greenhouse gases. Our vehicle emissions standards-which have always set the pace-now have been adopted by the federal government for the rest of the country.

Under AB 32, California has stepped out and crafted a bold plan to deal with climate change and foreign oil dependency. The plan will require less carbon in our fuels, more efficient technologies across a broad swath of businesses and a carefully designed cap and trade system that uses market incentives instead of prescriptive mandates.

As a result, California is attracting billions of dollars in clean tech venture capital investments. In 2011, almost 40% of such investments were made in California, making our state not only the leader in the nation but in the world.

My commitment is to continue these innovative programs and build on them in the coming year in every way that I can.

Just as bold is our plan to build a high-speed rail system, connecting the Northern and Southern parts of our state. This is not a new idea. As governor the last time, I signed legislation to study the concept. Now thirty years later, we are within weeks of a revised business plan that will enable us to begin initial construction before the year is out.

President Obama strongly supports the project and has provided the majority of funds for this first phase. It is now your decision to evaluate the plan and decide what action to take. Without any hesitation, I urge your approval.

If you believe that California will continue to grow, as I do, and that millions more people will be living in our state, this is a wise investment. Building new runways and expanding our airports and highways is the only alternative. That is not cheaper and will face even more political opposition.

Those who believe that California is in decline will naturally shrink back from such a strenuous undertaking. I understand that feeling but I don’t share it, because I know this state and the spirit of the people who choose to live here. California is still the Gold Mountain that Chinese immigrants in 1848 came across the Pacific to find. The wealth is different, derived as it is, not from mining the Sierras but from the creative imagination of those who invent and build and generate the ideas that drive our economy forward.  

Critics of the high-speed rail project abound as they often do when something of this magnitude is proposed. During the 1930’s, The Central Valley Water Project was called a “fantastic dream” that “will not work.” The Master Plan for the Interstate Highway System in 1939 was derided as “new Deal jitterbug economics.” In 1966, then Mayor Johnson of Berkeley called BART a “billion dollar potential fiasco.” Similarly, the Panama Canal was for years thought to be impractical and Benjamin Disraeli himself said of the Suez Canal: “totally impossible to be carried out.” The critics were wrong then and they’re wrong now.

Another huge issue we must tackle is water. Last week, Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar – met here in Sacramento with those in my administration who are working to complete the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. Together we agreed that by this summer we should have the basic elements of the project we need to build. This is something my father worked on and then I worked on-decades ago. We know more now and are committed to the dual goals of restoring the Delta ecosystem and ensuring a reliable water supply.

This is an enormous project. It will ensure water for 25 million Californians and for millions of acres of farmland as well a hundred thousand acres of new habitat for spawning fish and other wildlife. To get it done will require time, political will and countless permits from state and federal agencies. I invite your collaboration and constructive engagement.

Next, I want to say something about our schools. They consume more tax dollars than any other government activity and rightly so as they have a profound effect on our future. Since everyone goes to school, everyone thinks they know something about education and in a sense they do. But that doesn’t stop experts and academics and foundation consultants from offering their ideas – usually labeled reform and regularly changing at ten year intervals-on how to get kids learning more and better. It is salutary and even edifying that so much interest is shown in the next generation. Nevertheless, in a state with six million students, 300,000 teachers, deep economic divisions and a hundred different languages, some humility is called for.

In that spirit, I offer these thoughts. First, responsibility must be clearly delineated between the various levels of power that have a stake in our educational system. What most needs to be avoided is concentrating more and more decision-making at the federal or state level. For better or worse, we depend on elected school boards and the principals and the teachers they hire. To me that means, we should set broad goals and have a good accountability system, leaving the real work to those closest to the students. Yes, we should demand continuous improvement in meeting our state standards but we should not impose excessive or detailed mandates.

My budget proposes to replace categorical programs with a new weighted student formula that provides a basic level of funding with additional money for disadvantaged students and those struggling to learn English. This will give more authority to local school districts to fashion the kind of programs they see their students need. It will also create transparency, reduce bureaucracy and simplify complex funding streams.

Given the cutbacks to education in recent years, it is imperative that California devote more tax dollars to this most basic of public services. If we are successful in passing the temporary taxes I have proposed and the economy continues to expand, schools will be in a much stronger position.

No system, however, works without accountability. In California we have detailed state standards and lots of tests. Unfortunately, the resulting data is not provided until after the school year is over. Even today, the ranking of schools based on tests taken in April and May of 2011 is not available. I believe it is time to reduce the number of tests and get the results to teachers, principals and superintendents in weeks, not months. With timely data, principals and superintendents can better mentor and guide teachers as well as make sound evaluations of their performance. I also believe we need a qualitative system of assessments, such as a site visitation program where each classroom is visited, observed and evaluated. I will work with the State Board of Education to develop this proposal.

The house of education is divided by powerful forces and strong emotions. My role as governor is not to choose sides but to listen, to engage and to lead. I will do that. I embrace both reform and tradition-not complacency. My hunch is that principals and teachers know the most, but I’ll take good ideas from wherever they come.

As for pensions, I have put forth my 12 point proposal. Examine it. Improve it. But please take up the issue and do something real. I am committed to pension reform because I believe there is a real problem. Three times as many people are retiring as are entering the workforce. That arithmetic doesn’t add up. In addition, benefits, contributions and the age of retirement all have to balance. I don’t believe they do today. So we have to take action. And we should do it this year.  

As for prison realignment, we are just at the beginning. The cooperation of sheriffs, police chiefs, probation officers, district attorneys and local officials has been remarkable. But we have much to do-to protect public safety and reduce recidivism-and together, we’ll get it done.

It is one thing to pass a law and quite another to implement it and make it work.

As I see it, that’s my job as governor and chief executive: make the operations of government work-efficiently, honestly and in the peoples’ interest. With your help, that’s what we’ll do in 2012 and prove the declinists wrong once again.

Thank you.