Getting There: P a r t III T h e D e a d l i n e Pa s s e s
Meanwhile, the governor ’s relationship with Republicans took on a testy edge. The chair of the State Republican Party offered Brown an invitation to debate Grover Norquist—author of the no-tax pledge that many legislative Republicans had signed. Brown, who had criticized Norquist as an out-of-state interferer with California democracy, declined the invitation but offered to send his dog Sutter instead for such a
“I meet with them all the time, night and day.” —Governor Jerry Brown asked if he is meeting with Republicans a week before his 60-day deadline expired
76
debate. And on March 10, Day 60—the official deadline day—came and went without a deal.
As the 60-day deadline Brown had set for the
A few days later at a Republican state convention, the
legislature to pass a budget and put tax extensions
conservative California Republican Assembly faction
on the ballot approached, there was no sign of the
pushed to label any Party legislators who voted for
latter happening. The needed Republican votes were
Brown’s proposed tax extension ballot measure as
still lacking. The governor worked on rounding up
“traitorous.” 7 9 (A resolution to that effect was never
business support, hoping Republicans would respond
passed.) At around that time, Republican legislators
to the business community. As noted earlier, the state
who had been in talks with Brown added relaxation
Chamber of Commerce did not exactly endorse the
of various environmental rules to their terms for a
specifics of his plan but hinted that a deal which
deal, i.e., issues that were not directly connected to
included comprehensive reform (essentially other
fiscal affairs. Such a deal would have been particularly
items such as pensions) would be supported. The Bay
difficult for Brown since voters had rejected an attempt
Area Council was more explicit in supporting the
to relax environmental rules the previous November.
governor ’s plan, as was the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. Business groups in the Los Angeles area also
By mid-March, the legislator had approved a modified
gave support. But from the conservative Howard
version of Brown’s spending plan, i.e., with cuts at a
Jarvis, such business support was characterized as
level that still assumed revenue from tax extensions
“appeasement” of legislative Democrats.
77
would be forthcoming. In some instances, however, Republican votes were not forthcoming for the cuts.
Brown continued to believe that he could garner a
Brown complained that “they don’t want to balance
few needed Republican votes and suggested that the
the budget with cuts. And they don’t appear to want
60-day deadline might have to slip a bit. However,
to balance it with new revenues. So they must want a
on March 7, five Republican legislators—the “Gang
profound, continuing unbalanced budget.” 8 0 And he
of Five”—sent a polite letter to the governor saying
continued to predict there would be a ballot measure
that since their proposals for “real reform” were
“one way or another.” 8 1
evidently not acceptable, the talks had “reached an impasse.”7 8 Their proposals—the precise wording of
Such complaints and predictions, however, did not
which was never completely clear—were developed
produce the needed Republican votes for a ballot
with the advice of two fiscal consultants, one of whom,
measure on tax extensions. And, from a purely
Mike Genest, was a past budget director of Governor
administrative perspective, it was becoming doubtful
Schwarzenegger and who was also connected to
that a special election could be held by June. Still,
groups pushing for public pension cuts.
Brown did not concede that the deadline had truly
52
uc l a Lu s k i n s c h o o l o f p ub l i c a f f a i r s
CPO_2012_final.indb 52
12/13/11 4:13 PM