The governor is the chief executive of the state of California. He or she submits a budget, gives the State of the State address annually and sees that state laws are enforced.  Besides having the power to appoint judges and other officials and demand accountability of them, the governor can also issue pardons and proclamations, and mobilize the National Guard during emergencies. The governor may suggest and veto legislation and call the Legislature into special session during a crisis.

California had governors from 1837, when Mexico adopted a new constitution, until 1848, when the United States acquired California after the Mexican-American War. That same year, gold was discovered. Tens of thousands of men—and a few women—immigrated to California, where no real government existed. Concerned citizens demanded one, and got together for a constitutional convention.

The office of governor was reaffirmed by California’s 1849 constitution even before statehood was granted. In fact, copies of that constitution were passed out in the U.S. Congress to help legislators deliberate. The question of whether California should be a slave or free state stymied Congress for months, but on September 9, 1850, California was admitted as a free state to the union, with a working government already in place. Peter Burnett, the first governor, had been voted in on November 13, 1849—the same day that the constitution was ratified. He vetoed many actions of the Legislature, was mocked by the press and resigned early in 1851, citing personal reasons.

Governors originally had two-year terms until a constitutional amendment changed that to four years in 1863. A constitutional amendment in 1911 made it possible to recall a governor by a vote of the people. From the beginning of statehood until 1940, the gubernatorial vote count was sealed and sent to the Speaker of the Assembly and not unsealed until January. Even after 1940, into the mid-1960s, governors took the oath office on the Assembly floor. Today, the governor’s inauguration is usually a small, sometimes private ceremony near the state capitol building.

The governorship is one of many state offices in which primary elections narrow the voters’ choices to the “Top Two” vote-getters. At the general election, always held in November, the governor is selected. However, other methods have been used over the years. From 1913 till 1959, gubernatorial candidates could cross-file with other political parties in the primaries. Primaries became closed to registered party member in 1960, then were opened again in 1996. The practice was stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000. In 2010, the current system was adopted.

The 20^th century saw a number of powerful governors come to office. Hiram Johnson was a two-term governor, elected in 1910 as a Republican, who battled railroad barons and corporate-driven corruption while championing a series of progressive causes. In 1912, he was a founder of the national Progressive Party and was its nominee for vice president on a ticket with Theodore Roosevelt.

Governor Earl Warren was a crusading district attorney for 14 years before becoming the only California governor elected to three successive terms (1942, 1946 and 1950). He was the Republican nominee for vice president in 1948 on a losing ticket with Thomas E. Dewey and was appointed Supreme Court chief justice by President Dwight Eisenhower in 1953. Although generally regarded as a centrist (a conservative in some quarters), Warren presided over a court that handed down a series of decisions hailed by liberals, including ones that attacked segregation, established one-man-one-vote, and promoted rights of the accused.

Edmund G. “Pat” Brown was elected governor in 1958, becoming only the second Democrat to hold the office since 1899. (Culbert Olson, 1939-43, was the first.) The two-term governor’s campaign slogan was “Think Big” and he did, expanding the state’s university system and establishing the state’s first commission on equal employment opportunities. More than 1,000 miles of freeway were built during his tenure, as well as systems of canals, pipelines and dams to bring water to the southern part of the state. Brown defeated future President Richard Nixon for his second term in 1962, prompting the embittered candidate to say, “You won’t have Nixon to kick around anymore because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.”

Brown lost a bid for a third term in 1966 to Ronald Reagan, who had burnished his credentials as a conservative while supporting the presidential candidacy of Barry Goldwater in 1964. Reagan campaigned against the “welfare state” and a counterculture that was advocating civil rights and social activism.

He was followed in office in 1976 by Edmund G. Brown, Jr.—Jerry Brown, son of the former governor—an enigmatic former Jesuit seminarian who warned of an “era of limits” and backed a balanced budget amendment while promoting the state’s interests in protecting the environment, encouraging new technology, promoting the arts and expanding civil rights. He dated pop superstar Linda Rondstadt and was known to many, perhaps unfairly, as “Governor Moonbeam” for some of his perceived personal eccentricities. 

Jerry Brown served two terms and returned for a second tour of duty in 2011, but in the interim the state elected Republicans George Deukmejian and Pete Wilson to two terms each before turning to Democrat Gray Davis in 1998. During Davis’ first term, the dot-com bubble burst and a newly-deregulated energy industry suffered sky-rocketing prices. Suicide bombers attacked the country on September 11, 2001 and California’s modest budget surplus turned into a gaping $30 billion deficit. 

For the only time in state history, Californians voted in October 2003 to recall a sitting governor, replacing Davis with Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger. The actor/businessman-turned-politician swaggered into office with a popularity rating as high as Davis’ was low. By the time Schwarzenegger left office in 2010, his poll numbers looked like Davis at his worst. The state’s economy (and the nation’s) was in a shambles and years of budget gimmicks left another giant deficit. Shortly after leaving office, it was revealed that Schwarzenegger had fathered a child by his housekeeper. His wife, Maria Shriver, filed for divorce.

California’s Legislature (pdf)

Governor’s Elections in California (Public Policy Institute of California) (pdf)

The governor is the chief executive of the state of California, elected every four years and serving a maximum of two terms. Governors must be at least 18 years old, U.S. citizens and residents of California, and may not hold any other public office while governor. The state’s constitution says that “The Governor shall see that the law is faithfully executed.”

Also in the constitution are these duties: the governor must prepare and submit a budget covering all expenditures for all branches of state government within the first 10 days of the year. The most recent proposed budget is online. The governor also reports annually to the Legislature on the State of the State and makes recommendations. The governor is commander-in-chief of the California National Guard and in emergencies can mobilize and direct state resources. This power covers any emergency, from local civil unrest to earthquakes and other natural disasters.

The governor appoints judges and thousands of other officials, from state department heads to museum board members. Many appointments, appointees and opportunities for appointments are listed on a special web page. Some of these must be confirmed by the Senate. Judges and justices in the Courts of Appeal and Supreme Court must be confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments, but judges in lower courts are not. In case of a vacancy, the governor nominates candidates to the following constitutional, elective offices to serve until the next election: Superintendent of Public Instruction, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Controller, Treasurer, Attorney General, and members of the State Board of Equalization. The nominations go before the state Senate and Assembly for confirmation. If death, resignation or removal of a U.S. senator, state-wide officer, or a county supervisor leaves their seat vacant, the governor appoints someone to the position for the remainder of their term.

Governors may require officers or employees of state agencies to furnish information about their operations. An example of this is Executive Order B-14-11, issued by Governor Jerry Brown in December 2011, in which he ordered all agency secretaries and department directors to list all reports required by the Legislature, identifying those “that may no longer be of significant value,” among other things. The governor may also reorganize non-elected officers and their agencies, assign them new duties, consolidate offices and functions, or reorganize state government agencies in other ways. If the governor creates a reorganization proposal it becomes law 60 days after being submitted to the Legislature, unless the Senate or Assembly take action to stop it.

The governor can propose new laws and approve or veto (including line-item) legislation sent by the Legislature. Most confer with leaders of both houses of the Legislature on a regular basis. The governor appoints a legislative secretary to liaison with the Legislature. In an emergency—for example, a fiscal crisis—the governor can call the Legislature in to a special session to consider a specific issue. Executive orders from the governor can be used to implement policy, bypassing the Legislature in some areas.

A cabinet provides advice on policy and helps implement and coordinate decisions from the chief executive. It changes on a regular basis as governors shape and reshape their inner circle. Recent cabinets included the following heads of state agencies: Business, Transportation and Housing, Education, Environmental Protection, Finance, Food and Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Labor and Workforce Development, Natural Resources, State and Consumer Affairs, Veterans Affairs, and Corrections and Rehabilitation. In addition, the governor has her or his own selected staff in the office.

The governor wields influence as head of his or her political party in the state, and is also president of the University of California’s board of regents and the California State University’s board of trustees. And although it is not mentioned often, the governor is also the official organ of communication between the state government, the federal government and other states.

The power to grant pardons or reprieves and commute sentences rests with the governor as long as the person pardoned or reprieved has not been convicted of more than one felony, and as long as the conviction is not an impeachment. Also, the governor must explain the reasons for the pardon, reprieve or commutation to the Legislature. The governor can review decisions made by the parole authority about convicted murderers as well, within 30 days of each decision, and can affirm, modify or reverse the decisions. She or he can also offer rewards for certain criminal offenses.

The governor has a ceremonial role as well, as he or she is the head of state. Public appearances and parades, ribbon-cutting ceremonies, schmoozing with potential businesses and investors, and meeting visiting dignitaries are all important functions. In addition the governor can issue proclamations—which have legal standing—and lesser commemorative messages and letters to groups and residents of the state. To request these, anyone may write to the governor’s office.

Whenever the governor is disabled or leaves the state, the lieutenant governor assumes the responsibilities of the office.

Article 5  (California Constitution)

California State Government Guide (League of Women Voters of California)

The Governor (Chapter IV, California’s Legislature) (pdf)

The governor’s budget includes money to keep the governor’s office running. The proposed 2012-2013 budget marked $12.7 million for that purpose. Of that, $10.7 pays salaries and benefits and $2 million pays for operating expenses and equipment.

3-Year Budget (pdf)

Dream Act or Nightmare?

AB 131, the California Dream Act, was signed into law by Governor Brown in October 2011. As long as the UC regents approve it, the Dream Act goes into effect in 2013. Opponents threaten to put a referendum blocking it on the November 2012 ballot.

California’s Dream Act will allow thousands of students—5,462, according to the California Student Aid Commission—who are in the country illegally to receive state financial aid to attend public colleges. In the 2013-2014 school year, that may amount to over $13 million. In addition, low-income students at community colleges, some of whom may be undocumented, can get fee waivers and institutional aid may be provided at UC and CSU, all adding to the total. The students must meet the same requirements as all other applicants for financial aid, but will only qualify after all legal residents have applied.

Proponents point out that many students came to the states as children or babies and have done nothing wrong. As the San Francisco Chronicle put it, “Typically, such students have the hardest time paying for college because they cannot legally be employed, they qualify for no financial aid, and their parents often are not wealthy enough to help.”

While the Legislature, the governor and the heads of the three higher education systems in the state support the bill, others are outraged, saying the bill undermines federal immigration laws and sends the wrong message. “It is absolutely, fundamentally wrong and unfair and it is an insult to people who have worked and played by the rules, including those who have come to this legally,” Assembly member Tim Donnelly said to Fox News. He is one of the backers of a ballot initiative that could overturn the law.

Governor Brown Signs Second Half of California Dream Act (Associated Press)

Jerry Brown Signs Dream Act for Illegal Immigrants (by Nanette Asimov and Wyatt Buchanan, San Francisco Chronicle)

The Budget—Where to Cut?

Given the current economic climate, it is not a surprise that Governor Jerry Brown’s budget—the preparation and submission of which is constitutionally mandated—is being attacked from all sides.

For example, in his 2012-2013 budget, Brown proposed significant cuts to funding for subsidized child care. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) says these cuts amount to about 19%, or $391 million in FY 2012-2013, and could lead to 63,000 children being eliminated from subsidized child care. The budget would cut Title 5 funding by a tenth and raise the income eligibility limit for child care, hitting centers that serve low-income, working parents. These centers have already seen their funding reduced in recent years.

CaliforniaWatch summed up how these cuts would affect the neediest families: “The centers . . . can’t raise the rates that parents pay to make up the difference. . . . The centers also can’t decrease the number of children they serve or they would get less money. Plus, the current reimbursement rates already are lower than the rates of many other providers.”

The LAO admitted that Governor Brown’s plan “would streamline [a] complicated system” and “has many advantages.” However, the report suggested a modified version of the plan. Speaking of both child care and another Brown cut to the CalWORKs program, the LAO said that “by identifying a broad menu of savings options, we hope this report helps the Legislature as it determines how best to balance these multiple sets of competing objectives.”

The 2012-13 Budget: The Governor’s CalWORKs and Child Care Proposals (Legislative Analyst’s Office)

Legislature Should Reject Brown’s Child Care Cuts, Analyst Says (by Will Evans, CaliforniaWatch)

Pardons, Reprieves and Commutations

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger evoked howls of protest on his last night in office when he reduced the prison sentence of Esteban Nuñez—son of former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez—who had pleaded guilty in the 2008 stabbing death of a college student. Schwarzenegger was castigated for reducing the younger Nuñez’s sentence from 16 years to seven without warning the victim’s family ahead of time.

“This is dirty politics: cutting backroom deals,” said Fred Santos, father of victim Luis Santos. “I guess if you're the son of somebody important, you can kill someone and get all sorts of breaks.”

Esteban Nuñez, 21 at the time of his commutation, pleaded guilty after a murder charge was dropped and he was allowed to plead guilty to manslaughter and assault. His father later claimed that the judge had misled his son into thinking his sentence would be between 7 and 11 years. The elder Nuñez worked closely with the governor while in the Assembly and became a business partner at the consulting firm Mercury Public Affairs, home to  former high-level Schwarzenegger advisors.

California governors have broad power to grant clemency through pardons, commutations and reprieves. Pardons are granted after release from probation or parole, and generally after a 10-year waiting period.

Schwarzenegger issued a total of 16 pardons during his gubernatorial tenure. Governor Ronald Reagan granted 575 pardons between 1967-1975; Jerry Brown pardoned 403 criminals during his first tenure has governor, from 1975 to 1983; George Deukmejian pardoned 328 between 1983-1991; and Pete Wilson pardoned 10 between 1991 and 1999. Gray Davis did not grant any pardons from 1999-2003.

Jerry Brown pardoned 21 people in 2011 but did not issue any commutations or reprieves.

Governor Reduces Sentence of Former Assembly Speaker's Son (by Evan Halper and Tony Perry, Los Angeles Times)

Pardon Statistics from Other States (by Christopher Reinhart, OLR Research Report)

Gov. Schwarzenegger Grants Eight Pardons and One Conditional Pardon (Governor’s website)

Executive Report on Pardons, Commutations of Sentence and Reprieves (by Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr.) (pdf)

California Pardon Information (Pardon 411)

Gray Davis Recall

Gray Davis was elected to his first term as governor in 1998; he won by 19 points. The veteran Democratic politician had been Governor Jerry Brown’s chief of staff, an Assemblyman, state Controller and Lieutenant Governor.

Davis ran as a centrist on an education platform and upon taking office used the budget surplus to fulfill his campaign promise. His popularity peaked in February 2000 as did the dot-com boom. The tech bubble began to deflate in March, and it burst in April. Davis’ poll numbers remained high until January 2001, about the same time AOL merged with TimeWarner, communications giant WorldCom became the third largest bankruptcy ever, and $5 trillion in value disappeared from the stock market between 2000-2002.

California had begun to deregulate its energy market in 1996 and shortly before Davis took office utilities were selling their electricity generation stations. Wholesale prices were deregulated in 2000. Deregulation opened up the market to manipulation, which—combined with drought and delays in building new power plants—immediately led to record high energy prices and blackouts. Wholesale prices rose 800% between April 2000 and December.

Davis declared a state of emergency on January 17, 2001, as his political opponents blamed his policies for the crisis and him for being slow to act. “He could either capitulate to blackout blackmail and raise rates and cut long-term contracts, or he could have seized power plants,” said Harvey Rosenfield of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica.

All were fraught with political danger; Davis chose none of the above.

The governor had cut taxes upon taking office but California revenues were dropping and the once flush state was looking at looming deficits. A 10% surplus in 1999 and a projected 4% surplus in 2000 were giving way to a projected $23.6 billion shortfall in fiscal year 2002-03.

On September 11, 2001, as Davis was gearing up for his re-election bid, suicide bombers  jolted the state and nation. Markets and the state took another financial hit. Davis squabbled with legislative members of his own party and lacked strong support of a base that tended to view him as a politician who focused too strongly on fundraising. He was  re-elected with a plurality (47%–42%)  in November 2002 over businessman and political newcomer Bill Simon, Jr., but spent the next 10 months preparing for the recall election.

Talk radio was buzzing about a recall a month after the election, and in February 2003 the state GOP convention overwhelmingly backed the idea. Partisans began circulating recall petitions and got a big boost when U.S. Representative Darrell Issa—a Republican and former car alarm manufacturer worth an estimated $450 million—donated $2 million to gather signatures. The recall qualified for the October ballot in July and eventually 135 people, including actor and businessman Arnold Schwarzenegger, signed up to run for governor.

In the first week of October, just days before the vote, the Los Angeles Times reported in a series of articles that a number of women had accused Schwarzenegger of grabbing or groping them. After the initial article, Schwarzenegger apologized in general for “behaving badly” in the past, but as more women came forward to make accusations the issue drew stronger responses.

“This is unprecedented gutter, last-minute, gotcha journalism by the largest newspaper in the state,” said Rob Stutzman, a Schwarzenegger spokesman. “They're unfit to own a printing press, and we're not going to take it.” Schwarzenegger called it a “puke campaign.”

By election day, 15 women had leveled accusations, many of them detailed accounts of unwanted advances. The newspaper was accused of trying to influence the recall by publishing just before the vote. The newspaper denied that was the case. “We put the story in the paper when it was finished,” L.A. Times Managing Editor Dean Baquet said. “Keep in mind, after the story ran, Schwarzenegger acknowledged much of it.”

On October 7, 2003, more than 55% of the voters approved the recall of Davis, and Schwarzenegger convincingly won the race to replace him. Schwarzenegger got 48.6% of the vote. Next closest was Democrat Cruz Bustamante with 31.5% and conservative Republican Tom McClintock at 13.4%.

Green Party representative Peter Camejo finished fourth (2.8%), celebrity publisher Arianna Huffington was fifth (.55%), followed by businessman and former Olympics organizer Peter Ueberroth, adult publisher Larry Flynt and actor Gary Coleman. Pornstar Mary Carey finished 10^th, with 2,266 more votes than Bill Simon, the man who Gray Davis narrowly defeated for his second term.

Davis declared the state of emergency over on November 15, 2003. Two days later Schwarzenegger was sworn in. It was only the second recall of a governor in U.S. history.

Energy Crisis Cited as Turning Point for Davis (by Ed Mendel, San Diego Union-Tribune)

Overview of the Governor’s Budget, 2003-04 (Legislative Analyst’s Office) (pdf)

State GOP Backs Davis Recall Effort (by John Wildermuth, San Francisco Chronicle)

Davis Is Out, Schwarzenegger Is in by Big Margins in California Recall (by John M. Broder, New York Times)

Total Recall (The Economist)

3 More Women Allege Misconduct (by Sue Fox, Tracy Weber and Megan Garvey, Los Angeles Times)

4 More Women Go Public Against Schwarzenegger (by Gary Cohn, Carla Hall, Jack Leonard and Tracy Weber, Los Angeles Times)

Government-Mandated Vaccines

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a vaccine six years ago that would protect against several strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV). Governor Rick Perry of Texas ignited a firestorm when he signed an executive order making the vaccine mandatory. Although his order had been overturned by the Texas Legislature, Perry had to explain his act to national audiences when he ran for president.

California’s Governor Brown signed AB 499 into law in late 2011, allowing minors over 12 years old to seek medical treatment for the prevention of sexually transmitted disease—in other words, to get the HPV vaccine without parental consent. California’s law already allows those over 12 to seek certain types of medical treatment. Brown signed the law without comment, while some citizens expressed outrage and others cheered.

California Gov Signs Controversial Vaccine Law (by Ed Silverman, Pharmalot)

Assembly Bill 499 (California Legislative Information) (pdf)

This Law Cuts Out Parents and Sends the Wrong Message

“Social conservatives and some parents . . . are concerned that teenagers may interpret vaccination as a green light to engage in premarital sex,” wrote Ed Silverman in Pharmalot. He quoted a statement from Randy Tomasson, president of SaveCalifornia: “By signing AB 499 to coerce minors into risky Gardasil shots, Jerry Brown is deceptively telling preteen girls it will protect them from HPV, giving them a false sense of security that they can have all the sexual activity they want without risking developing cervical cancer or a raft of other negative consequences.”

Catholic Archbishop Jose H. Gomez of Los Angeles called the bill a “serious erosion of parental rights in California.” He criticized the new law when Governor Brown signed it and claimed it “bypasses parental involvement, wisdom and guidance.”

ChristianNewswire quoted bestselling author Teresa Tomeo on the issue: “It is frightening that some in our society continue to push parents out of the picture when it comes to major decisions involving their sons’ and daughters’ health and welfare,” Tomeo said. “Children can’t sign up for athletics—or be given as much as an aspirin in school—without Mom’s or Dad’s approval; but now, 12-year-olds in California can get the HPV vaccine without parental consent?!”

William May, chair of Catholics for the Common Good, called AB 499 a “sinister agenda of sexualizing our children.” He argued that, “Children can be easily intimidated or influenced by the authority of adults. . . There is money to be made by administering these vaccines and other drugs by the drug companies and service providers (like Planned Parenthood). What protects children from coercion driven by the profit motive?”

Kevin Snider, chief counsel of the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), a legal defense group concerned with religious freedom and parental rights, agreed: “AB 499 makes kids, who are among the most vulnerable people in the community, an easy prey for drug companies who are primarily interested in making more money.” PJI pointed out that pharmaceutical giants Merck and GlaxoSmithKline, who produce the HPV vaccine, make campaign donations to legislators, including three members of the state Senate Judiciary Committee that passed the bill.

Some opponents of the measure are concerned with the vaccine itself, which contains Gardasil. “What they are not telling you is that thousands of girls are having adverse reactions to the HPV Vaccines, some have even died—at last count, at least 103 lives have been lost,” warns the website TheTruthAboutGardasil. Those behind the website—who are social activists, not doctors—have raised funds to produce a film about the effects of Gardasil, which they claim induces “seizures, strokes, dizziness, fatigue, weakness, headaches, stomach pains, vomiting, muscle pain and weakness, joint pain, auto-immune problems, chest pains, hair loss, appetite loss, personality changes, insomnia, hand/leg tremors, arm/leg weakness, shortness of breath, heart problems, paralysis, itching, rashes, swelling, aching muscles, pelvic pain, nerve pain, menstrual cycle changes, fainting, swollen lymph nodes, night sweats, nausea, temporary vision/hearing loss.”

California Catholic Leaders Decry Child STD Vaccines (by Benjamin Mann, Catholics for the Common Good)

California Gov Signs Controversial Vaccine Law (by Ed Silverman, Pharmalot)

California Catholics, Parental Rights and Gardasil (by Ed Silverman, Pharmalot)

New California Law Frightens Bestselling Author Teresa Tomeo (Christian News Wire)

PJI Calls for Abstentions on AB 499 Vote (Catholics for the Common Good)

The Truth About Gardasil (TruthAboutGardasil.org)

Children’s Health Is the Point

Not all Catholics agree about the HPV vaccine. “To say that giving the vaccine is the same as handing a kid birth control pills or condoms is just ridiculous, not to mention dangerous,” wrote Cathy O’Connell in U.S. Catholic. She elaborated: “The HPV vaccine protects even those young women who will not have sex until their wedding night! We’re talking about CANCER here, folks.

“The HPV vaccine protects our girls whether they have sex for the first time at 16 or 36. Are people seriously suggesting that parents should pass up the vaccine because they think their child will see it as some kind of permission to be sexually active? Give me a break.”

“Allowing preteen and teenage girls to seek the HPV vaccine independently is not some fluky radical doctrine designed to encourage moral anarchy and undermine the parent’s role in society,” wrote Francesca Bessey on USC’s NeonTommy site “The government isn’t trying to wage some sort of war on parental authority; in fact parents are hardly part of the issue at all. The goal is to keep people safe and healthy, regardless of age . . . what the goal translates to is getting as many preteen girls vaccinated against HPV as possible.”

She pointed out that 12,000 women will develop cervical cancer each year and statistically, a third of them will die of the disease. Gardasil protects against 70% of cervical cancer cases. “Parents of preteen girls need to stop raising hell over the supposed implications of California’s new HPV vaccine law and consider the message it’s really trying to send: this vaccine should be as accessible as possible, to help keep young women safe, educated, and free of disease.”

Can We Please Stop Equating the HPV Vaccine with Permission to Have Teen Sex? (by Cathy O’Connell, U.S. Catholic)

California’s HPV Vaccine Law Saves Lives (by Francesca Bessey and NeonTommy, Annenberg Digital News, USC)

Spending Cuts to California’s Colleges & Universities

Governor Brown’s proposed 2012-2013 budget cuts billions from California’s public universities, colleges and community colleges. In the budget, higher education accounts for 10.1% of spending—the lowest percentage in over three decades. That number could be further reduced, depending on whether a proposed tax hike is passed. If it is not, further cuts will be triggered.

Cuts to Higher Education Are a Necessary Evil

Tuition hikes in response to budget cuts have been going on for a few years. In 2010, Shirley Svorny, a professor of economics, disagreed with “critics who insist that higher education subsidies are critical for California’s economic growth and prosperity.”

 “This is not true,” Svorny insisted. “The state’s prosperity rests on public policies that encourage economic activity, not heavy subsidies to higher education.” She believed that pumping more money into the state’s higher education system would be better used to create jobs and bolster the economy.

“Artificially low fees attract some students to higher education who simply aren’t suited to the academic rigors of a university. Ultimately, the presence of these lower-achieving students hurts those who are more academically inclined.” Svorny argued that “California needs to cut state spending in ways that won’t discourage business growth. That’s where raising student fees can help. The state is better off addressing its solvency than continuing hefty subsidies to higher education, which puts the state’s financial stability at risk.”

“We Send Too Many Students to College” is the title of one of Marty Nemko’s columns, wherein he echoed some of Svorny’s concerns. Many students drop out, and “most of those college dropouts leave college having learned little of practical value and with devastated self-esteem and a mountain of debt.”

“Colleges are a business, and students are a cost item while research is a profit center.” Nemko, who has written five published books on colleges and careers, wrote that while “professors who bring in big research dollars are almost always rewarded,” the lowly students are taught in “the cheapest way possible: large lecture classes, with small classes staffed by rock-bottom-cost graduate students.” Nemko suggested that “Colleges, which receive billions of tax dollars with minimum oversight, should be held at least as accountable as companies are. . . . Yet, year after year, colleges turn out millions of defective products: students who drop out or graduate with far too little benefit for the time and money spent.”

“Budget cuts threaten the ideal of open access to higher education,” began a Los Angeles Times editorial. “Drastic changes are in order.” The Times took a practical approach, not arguing the right or wrong of cuts but how to deal with them. “Make no mistake,” the editorial cautioned while describing proposed changes, “community colleges would be transformed in ways that would make them nearly unrecognizable to Californians who cherish the old something-for-everyone system.”

The changes suggested by the Student Success Task Force include giving priority to students with a specific goal so they can “move through the system fluidly.” Fees and low priority standing would discourage students who simply want to enrich themselves or take an exercise class. “These restrictions aren’t something to celebrate,” said the Times, but “fair and sensible.” “No one likes the idea of rationing education, but the reality is that access is already being rationed—in unfair ways that harm entering students. This rationing would make the colleges more efficient.”

Make College Cost More (by Professor Shirley V. Svorny, Los Angeles Times op-ed)

We Send Too Many Students to College (by Marty Nemko, MartyNemko.com)

Community College Makeover (Los Angeles Times editorial)

Stop Cutting into California’s Future by Cutting Higher Education Funds

In a letter to budget committee leaders in the Legislature, California Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom—who sits on both the UC board of regents and the California State University board of trustees—wrote “As the need for workers with postsecondary education increases, our higher education institutions must accelerate graduations rates to keep up with the demand. California must recommit and reinvest in its world-class public higher education system, or accept a workforce that is under skilled and unprepared for the next economy.

“The proposal before you [in the budget are] . . . once again placing the burden of our fiscal problems on the very students who will help lead California out of this morass. These cuts are shortsighted and disproportionally affect minorities.” Newsom finished, “In these troubled times let us not take away the very tools necessary to propel California into a bright future.”

“The corporate state of California, ever ready to seize its ideological and commercial hour during a recession, has a chokehold on California’s public universities,” wrote Ralph Nader. Tuition for University of California undergrads quadrupled in 10 years even before the release of the 2012-2013 budget, Nader noted. Then he brought up the post World War II idea of an ‘educational fee’ close to zero, from city college of New York to UC Berkeley. “No more,” he lamented. “Those gates of opportunity are crumbling at an accelerating pace.”

“This is an attack on education on all fronts,” wrote Raewyn Smith in the Daily Sundial, a Cal State University newspaper. “Without higher education in this century, a well-paying job is a needle in a haystack, at best. Without higher education, the positions that are currently filled with baby boomers are soon going to find themselves without a qualified prospect.  Sorry, governor, but you and your colleagues cannot run California forever, and higher education is the one investment that should never be skimped on.”

Smith calls cutting education funding theft, pure and simple. “Theft from every student who has ever dreamed of higher education. Theft from the people who have returned to school to better their lives because minimum wage just doesn’t cut it anymore.

“But most important, it’s theft from California and the future.”

President Barack Obama made a similar point, using his bully pulpit at a luncheon for the National Governors Association. “Nothing more clearly signals what you value as a state than the decisions you make about where to invest. Budgets are about choices, so today I’m calling on all of you: Invest more in education, invest more in our children and in our future.”

The president continued, “The jobs of the future are increasingly going to those with more than a high school degree. . . . When I speak about higher education we’re not just talking about a four-year degree. We’re talking about somebody going to a community college and getting trained for that manufacturing job that now is requiring somebody walking through the door, handling a million-dollar piece of equipment. And they can’t go in there unless they’ve got some basic training beyond what they received in high school.”

“We can’t allow higher education to be a luxury in this country. It’s an economic imperative that every family in American has to be able to afford.”

Letter from Gavin Newsom to Senator Mark Leno and Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield

Ralph Nader Editorializes Against Higher Education Spending Cuts in California (Independent Political Report)

Higher Education Funding Left in the Hands of Voters (by Raewyn Smith, Daily Sundial)

Remarks by the President at National Governors Association Meeting (Speeches & Remarks, the White House)

New Department of Human Resources

Governor Jerry Brown created Reorganization Plan #1 to create a California Department of Human Resources (CalHR) that would streamline state personnel services that are currently handled by the Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) and the five-member State Personnel Board (SPB). DPA would be folded into the new department, and SPB would limit itself to constitutionally-delegated functions, such as disciplinary action and employment classification changes. The Department of Fair Employment and Housing would handle complaints based on gender and racial discrimination. Responsibility for the day-to-day personnel matters would go to the new department.

After reviews and public hearings, the Little Hoover Commission said “the plan represents an important step toward addressing a 30-year-old governance conflict,” and said it “should move forward.” Governor Brown’s plan called for implementation on July 1, 2012.

A Review of the Governor’s Reorganization Plan to Unify and Streamline the California State Personnel System (Little Hoover Commission) (pdf)

Arnold Schwarzenegger, 2003-2010. Schwarzenegger, famous worldwide as an actor and bodybuilder, was elected governor following the recall of Gray Davis. His term was marked by dramatic highs and lows in popularity and some of his reform efforts failed. He signed bills creating the nation’s first cap on greenhouse gas emissions of utilities and manufacturing plants, and a global warming bill that restricted utilities and large corporations from entering into long-term contracts with companies that don’t meet state emission standards. Reports of sexual misconduct before, during and after his governorship, however, grabbed most of the headlines. Schwarzenegger’s wife, Maria Shriver, filed for divorce six months after he left office when it became known that he had fathered a child with a member of their household staff.

Gray Davis, 1999-2003. Like many governors, Davis carved out a career in public service, in his case moving from the army to state government. He was Governor Jerry Brown’s chief of staff from 1975-1981 and served in the Assembly from 1983-1987. As governor, he spent large amounts of money on education with measurable results, but got blamed for the California energy crisis of 2001. During that crisis, market manipulation of the electrical supply led to blackouts and energy shortages, and Davis was perceived as not doing enough to solve the problems. He was recalled from office in 2003, only the second governor in the nation’s history to be recalled.

Pete Wilson, 1991-1999. Wilson entered office during an economic recovery from the worst slump since the Great Depression—at that time. He focused on job creation and budget discipline. Wilson signed the Three Strikes Law, and oversaw the deregulation of the state’s energy market—the first such process in the U.S. After leaving office, he has worked in the banking industry.

George Deukmejian, 1983-1991. Deukmejian is remembered for successful economic policies that created over 2.8 million new jobs in California. He froze appointments, made spending cuts, and fought tax hikes proposed by the Legislature. Since his first term began during a recession, his frugal policies were popular and created a budget surplus.

Edmund G. Brown, Jr., 1975-1984. He was elected governor again in 2010.

Ronald Reagan, 1967-1975. Reagan’s administrative experience came from leading the Screen Actors Guild and his involvement with the Republican Party. As governor, he froze state hiring, raised taxes and worked with a Democratic Legislature to reform the state welfare system. After leaving office, he served two terms as the 40^th President of the United States.

Edmund G. Brown, 1959-1967. “Pat” Brown was only the second Democrat to be elected governor in the 20^th century. Before becoming governor, he had served as district attorney in San Francisco, then as the Attorney General of California. In his second election as governor, he defeated Richard Nixon prompting the now-famous Nixon quote to the media, “You won’t have Nixon to kick around anymore because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.” He was defeated in a run for a third term by Ronald Reagan.

Brown’s campaign slogan in his second race was “Think big,” and he is remembered for big projects, like expanding the state’s university system and establishing the state’s first commission on equal employment opportunities. Over 1,000 miles of freeway were built during his two terms, as well as systems of canals, pipelines and dams to bring water to the southern part of the state. Brown’s influence on the state is the subject of a 2011 film, California State of Mind.

Goodwin J. Knight, 1953-1959. Knight pushed for water conservation and saw the beginning of the Feather River Project.

Earl Warren, 1943-1953. Warren rose through California’s ranks as a city attorney, deputy district attorney, and District Attorney for his city and county in the San Francisco Bay area, then became state Attorney General and finally governor. He built a reputation as a hard-working, tough prosecutor, busting rackets and gambling dens. He supported the deportation of Japanese Americans during World War II, viewed the Communist Party as a threat to democracy, and was seen as a staunch conservative. As governor, he began to embody a more liberal stance; for example, he supported compulsory health insurance for Californians as early as 1945. He raised unemployment insurance and established the Board of Corrections and Prisoner Rehabilitation Act to reform prisons.

Earl Warren resigned as governor when President Dwight Eisenhower appointed him Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He led the court through groundbreaking decisions like Brown v. Board of Education, which found that racial segregation violated the Fourteenth Amendment and was therefore illegal; Miranda v. Arizona, which affirmed that people accused of crimes have the right to attorney’s advice before speaking to police; and several cases that decided that children could not be forced to pray in school. His obituary in the New York Times read, “Earl Warren championed the Constitution as the vigorous protector of the individual rights and equality of all Americans.”  The paper said he “contributed greatly to a reshaping of the country’s social and political institutions.”

Culbert L. Olson, 1939-1943. Olson, the only Democratic California governor during the first 60 years of the 20^th century, was born in Utah and as a state legislator there advocated an end to child labor, progressive taxation, old age pensions, government control of public utilities and legal protection for trade unionists. He moved to California in 1920, campaigned for Socialist Party gubernatorial candidate Upton Sinclair and was a strong supporter of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. Olson, an atheist, was defeated for re-election in 1942 and became president of the United Secularists of America, a post he held until his death in 1962.

Frank F. Merriam, 1934-1939. Merriam had been Lieutenant Governor under James Rolph, when a long, bitter and sometimes violent strike by longshoremen on the West Coast broke out. Following Rolph’s death in office, violence escalated in San Francisco, culminating on “Bloody Thursday” July 5, 1934, when mounted police charged into a crowd of strikers and sympathizers, then fired on them. Merriam, the new governor, activated the state National Guard to restore order. In 1935 Merriam, the clear conservative choice, defeated writer and social activist Upton Sinclair—and his EPIC (End Poverty in California) project—to win a full term as governor. He lost the conservative support over the next four years as he raised taxes and actively supported New Deal programs like Social Security.

James Rolph, Jr., 1931-1934. An unpopular governor who died in office, Rolph ignored prohibition laws, approved taxes on the poor during the early Depression years, and instituted the California Sales Tax, which was called “pennies for Jimmy.”

C.C. Young, 1927-1931. Young signed the State Parks Commission and the Highway Patrol into being.

Friend Wm. Richardson, 1923-1927. A quaker, Richardson would allow no servants in the governor’s mansion, and vetoed most measures that would increase spending.

William D. Stephens, 1917-1923. During Stephens’ administration, labor radicals bombed the governor’s mansion, and another unrelated group threatened to blow up the mansion and the capitol.

Hiram Johnson, 1911-1917. Johnson was elected for one term as a Republican, and for a second as a Progressive. In fact, in 1912 Theodore Roosevelt selected Johnson as his running mate when he launched an unsuccessful Progressive Party campaign for the presidency. Johnson supported many Progressive programs as governor, including women’s suffrage, the popular election of U.S. senators (the state Legislature used to select them), and amending the state constitution to allow initiatives and referendums. Johnson resigned to serve as U.S. Senator, a position he held until his death in 1945.

James N. Gillett, 1907-1911

George C. Pardee, 1903-1907

Henry T. Gage, 1899-1903. Gage was a controversial governor. He denied that bubonic plague had broken out in San Francisco, although it had. He threatened martial law to end a strike, and would disguise himself and hang around the waterfront to make sure that no one was making trouble. Angered over a cartoon that portrayed him as a tool of railroad tycoon C. P. Huntington, Gage supported and signed an Anti-cartoon Bill, and another bill stating that all cartoons that cast aspersions on a politician’s reputation be signed.

James H. Budd, 1895-1899

Henry H. Markham, 1891-1895

Robert W. Waterman, 1887-1891

Washington Bartlett, 1887. Bartlett suffered a stroke and died after nine months in office.

George Stoneman, 1883-1887

George C. Perkins, 1880-1883

William Irwin, 1875-1880

Romualdo Pacheco, 1875.  Pacheco was the first governor born in California, but served only the few remaining months of Newton’s Booth term.

Newton Booth, 1871-1875 Resigned to become a U.S. Senator.

Henry H. Haight, 1867-1871. Building on his predecessor’s education work, Haight established the University of California, as well as a State Board of Health.

Frederick F. Low, 1863-1867. Low worked to better education in the state, using land grants to support higher education.

Leland Stanford, 1862-1863. Stanford is best remembered as one of the “Big Four” rail tycoons (sometimes called “robber barons”) who built the transcontinental railroad. He also founded and endowed Stanford University in honor of his one son who died young. As governor, he lengthened the term of the office from two to four years, cut the state debt in half, and supported the conservation of the state’s forests and other legislative reforms.

John G. Downey, 1860-1862. As governor, Downey vetoed the Bulkhead Bill, which would have allowed a monopoly to take control of the San Francisco waterfront.

Milton S. Latham, 1860. Latham was a pro-Southern Democrat elected governor a year before the Civil War. His opponents worried that he would allow slavery in California, so two days after he was sworn in, the Legislature offered him a U.S. Senate seat, recently vacated because the former Senator was killed in a duel. Latham took it.

John B. Weller, 1856-1860. Weller held many political positions in his lifetime. While governor, he led a raid on San Quentin Prison, seizing control from a commercial contractor.

L. Neely Johnson, 1856-1858. At 30 years old, Johnson remains the youngest governor in California’s history.

John Bigler, 1852-1856. A journalist and lawyer, Bigler came to California in search of gold, like many others. Unlike most, he brought his family and immediately sought political office. He was elected to the Assembly in 1849, became speaker, then governor. A large lake was named in his honor during his term, but in 1870 the body of water was renamed Lake Tahoe.

John McDougall, 1851-1852

Peter H. Burnett, 1849-1851. Burnett was raised in Missouri, studied law, then moved his family to Oregon in 1842. As a legislator there, he once proposed that all free blacks should be forced to leave Oregon or be whipped every six months if they resisted. In California, he was elected governor before statehood was achieved. He pushed to have African Americans expelled from California as well, imposed the foreign miners tax, and promoted the extermination of Native Americans. When criticized by the press and Legislature after his first (and last) annual address, he abruptly resigned.

Governor’s Gallery (Governor’s Library)

California Governors (Toucan Valley Publications)