Op-Ed
Newton: A meeting of California minds
Jerry Brown and Michael Milken discuss schools, pension reform, prisons — and kale.
The occasion was last week's State of the State Conference put on by the Milken Institute. The day was full of wisdom and, surprisingly, optimism, as some of California's best minds and sharpest business types appraised the state and found reason for both concern and hope.
But the main event was the dialogue between Milken and Brown, icons of dichotomous California — the ascetic governor sharing a stage with the financial wizard whose name was once synonymous with greed. Jerry Brown, who once slept on a futon, in conversation with the man who made a vast fortune while presiding over the bond department of Drexel Burnham Lambert, then went to prison for securities violations and then reemerged as a studious philanthropist and engaged citizen.
It's easy to imagine that these two would give each other wide berth. But in one of those weird examples of the spectrum bending at the ends and joining back in the middle, California's Zen Jesuit and its former San Fernando Valley junk-bond king found much to agree about.
Milken is not a model interviewer. He insisted on referring to the governor throughout as "Jerry." He likes to talk about himself and devoted at least as much attention to praising Brown as to questioning him. Nevertheless, he succeeded in drawing out the governor, engaging him in a reflection on the relative costs of prisons and schools, the need to strip back excessive regulation that is thwarting job growth, and the pressing demand for pension reform. It even looked for a minute as if Brown might make a little news: The governor promised he would not draw on his various state pensions — he's been governor twice, as well as attorney general and mayor of Oakland — until he has fixed the pension system. He later said he was kidding.
Brown was typically elliptical and cool, and he matched Milken's occasional meandering with some of his own. When Milken asked him about paying for California's higher education system, Brown launched into an alternately loopy and inspiring riff on what it takes to educate children, most of which had nothing to do with Milken's question. His bottom line, though, was worth considering. Education, he said, requires rigor and imagination. Too much imagination leads to insanity; too much rigor leads to stasis. The answers, as often for Brown, lie in balance.
Brown was similarly shrewd on politics. Fear, he warned, drives bad policy. In the years since he left the governorship the first time, California has built 23 prisons and just two new colleges. The federal government, responding to the threat of terrorism, has limited the number of immigrants who can come here to live. Those are irrational responses to fear, and Brown longs for a more rational and compassionate politics.
Milken, meanwhile, kept up a steady stream of praise. He compared Brown to Albert Einstein and Thomas Edison, neither of which was very apt. Brown is an eccentric politician, and he founded two schools: a military academy, and a school for the arts. But don't count on him to invent a light bulb.
Watching the two men on the dais, it was hard for someone who grew up in California not to compare them with their younger selves. And they too seemed aware of the passage of time. Milken reminisced about having known Brown for 40 years and boasted of feeling younger than ever. Brown didn't exactly bite. He said he sometimes feels youthful and other times old — no surprise given the challenges he confronts in Sacramento.
The gaunt Milken also has a distracting preoccupation with weight. He displayed photos of Brown as a younger man, asserting his suspicion that Brown, who once weighed over 200 pounds, held off on running for governor again until he could present a slimmer self to the public. Twice, he prodded Brown to say how much he weighed. Either out of deference or embarrassment, Brown gave in: "About 175."
Later, Milken showed a series of slides, illustrating his concern about Californians' taste for such things as deep-fried butter and chocolate-covered bacon. Brown did his best to share Milken's outrage. He said he's recently "gotten excited about kale." With a little olive oil and salt, he insisted, "it's pretty damn good."
Brown and Milken are no longer the dapper turks who once dazzled California. They're older now, eating kale and reminiscing. But neither the passage of time nor the many challenges both have faced has dimmed their devotion to the state or commitment to confronting its troubles. They express a common demand for better education, for a politics of growth and potential rather than fear and retreat. Each is fighting for those ideals. Both still have some roar left.
jim.newton@latimes.com
Comments (13)
Add / View comments | Discussion FAQIf you really want to understand what's going on in California, read this article. It's long and it rambles a bit, but it lays out the entire economic picture.
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2011/11/michael-lewis-201111
“It shows that the city’s [San Jose’s] pension costs when he first became interested in the subject were projected to run $73 million a year. This year they would be $245 million: pension and health-care costs of retired workers now are more than half the budget. In three years’ time pension costs alone would come to $400 million, though “if you were to adjust for real life expectancy it is more like $650 million.” Legally obliged to meet these costs, the city can respond only by cutting elsewhere. As a result, San Jose, once run by 7,450 city workers, was now being run by 5,400 city workers. The city was back to staffing levels of 1988, when it had a quarter of a million fewer residents… By 2014, Reed had calculated, a city of a million people, the 10th-largest city in the United States, would be serviced by 1,600 public workers.”
This is what's waiting for Los Angeles. In 2015, public employee retirement costs will consume 30% of the entire budget. In 2020, retirement costs will consume over50% of the budget. Massive employee cutbacks are going to begin 2014-2015, but nobody wants to talk about it.
How come it costs 50% more (after adjusting for inflation) for University of California Board of Regents Chair Lansing and President Yudof to provide the same service?
Total expenditures in the UC system in 1999-2000 were $3.2 billion to educate a student population of 154,000. Converted into 2011 dollars using the Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI calculator gets us to $4.3B in 2011 dollars, which comes out to $27,850 per student.
In 2011, the total UC system budget was $6.3 billion dollars: an increase of almost 50% after adjusting for inflation. Enrollment also rose - to 158,000 students, a 3% increase, yielding a cost per student of $39,750.
Costs went up 50% in 10 years. And yet the news out of UC President Yudof is that the UC system is "bracing" for 'another round of budget cuts'!
Email opinions to UC Board of Regents marsha.kelman@ucop.edu
The respected Standford University found that only 1/2 of 1 percent of released "lifers" commit a new crime of any kind. It is even rarer that they harm someone.
California needs real prison reform. The Parole Board should follow the law when finding "lifers" suitable for parole. Of course, we want dangerous people to remain locked up. But, the Parole Board is helping bankrupt California by denying parole to those who are not dangerous and who are extremely unlikely to commit new crime and who have met the criteria for parole suitability.
Nelson Mandala and others said words to the effect that you know a country by its prisons. The isolation cells in California are physchological torture.
The Supreme Court upheld the Constitution and California must reduce the number of prisoners packed in like feedlot cattle. It is time the Supreme Court also reviews the horrific isolation practices.




Letters »