A new governor

California’s state government — which controls nearly all of our
local public funding and services for our schools, roads, courts,
public health and social programs — is in grave need of new
leadership and accountable governance.
That’s not a startling revelation. We face a fiscal crisis that
now adds up to a $19 billion state budget deficit, thousands of
public worker furloughs and lost jobs and a $2.9 billion list of
IOUs and delayed payments being sent this week to local schools and
county governments by the state treasurer.
Voters are tired of feeling helpless, frustrated and angry over
the grid lock in Sacramento. But all calls for serious fiscal or
legislative reforms continue to die slow and silent deaths.
The opportunity for the single greatest reform could have come
this November when California voters will elect a new governor.
The choice between the two major party candidates couldn’t be
more clear. Or more disappointing.
Republican Meg Whitman has never served in public office before
and did not even vote in an election for 28 years. Her platforms on
immigration, gay marriage, the state’s budget crisis and pending
environmental legislation have all been fabricated to win votes,
not govern the state. She is a self-paid, plastic politician.
No better, her opponent Democrat Jerry Brown is a rubberized
recycled version of his former self. To date, his campaign has
offered very few clues about what his adminstration would stand
for. What little he has said sounds very vague, but somehow very
familiar.
A vote for Whitman will bring more of the anti-tax and deep
spending cuts now favored by the “Republicants” in Sacramento.
Voting for Brown looks like voting for continued public union
control of too many special programs and pension funds that are
contributing to the state’s deep, deep deficit.
Neither candidate thus far could be mistaken for a “reform”
candidate, let alone showing any promise of boldness, innovation
and independence required under truly new leadership.
Most of what either gubernatorial candidate really believes and
what they will allow to guide them as California’s new governor is
obscured in today’s political rhetoric.
Whitman wants to annul the state’s climate change legislation
(AB32) on the November ballot, Brown remains an environmental
champion. Brown supports gay marriage, Whitman does not. Whitman
has endorsed tighter immigration laws while we can only assume
Brown is taking the more liberal stance.
But, what is abundantly clear is that, come November 2, one of
these two people will be our new governor.
Certain times and challenges call out for a certain form of new
leadership. When California emerged from World War II it needed a
strong advocate for a muscular infrastructure and great new public
institutions. That leader was Gov. Edmund G. “Pat” Brown Sr.
Elected in 1958 he oversaw the building of California as the
“Golden State.” California’s public universities, water aqueducts
and modern highways were the best in the world.
In 1966, California’s people became torn apart by a series of
bitter social upheavals. Anti-war protestors burned college
buildings; farmworkers went on strike; and, some police units
turned renegade. Gov. Ronald Reagan brought “law and order” to
college campuses and to state programs. He was not being a
politician; he was being an “authentic” leader.
Jerry Brown (son of Pat Brown) served as governor from
1975-1983. He opposed Prop. 13 and favored a “balanced budget”
amendment to the state’s constitution. Any attempts to bring vision
or bold leadership to California during the era of Prop. 13’s new
limits would have been bankrupted just as his were.
His opposition to Prop. 13 led to his defeat in 1983 by George
Deukmejian. The all-but-forgotten lineup of successors to
California’s governorship since then has included Pete Wilson, Gray
Davis and Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Somehow, adding either Whitman’s or Brown’s name to that list of
disappointments seems painfully fitting.
— Rollie Atkinson