LOS ANGELES TIMES INTERVIEW : Willie Brown : Still in Control Though Just Another Assemblyman

He is at once the consummate insider and undeniable outsider, the man who has wielded unprecedented power in the halls of the Legislature as its longest-serving Speaker and, all the while, nursed the hurt that his political career will end there because, he says, California will not let an African-American man rise higher.

Whatever people think of him, he is the most polarizing of California political figures, a representation of awfulness to Republicans and the symbol of liberal persistence to Democrats. Say his name--everyone calls him “Willie”--and the vision conjures before you: The man in the luxurious Italian suits, shoes that cost more than a month’s rent, the flashy sports cars, the visible love life and wisecracking, acerbic, genteel, insulting, gracious, ever perplexing Willie L. Brown Jr., assemblyman from San Francisco.

For the first time in 14 years, that is all he is--even though his staff continues to rankle Republicans by sending out press releases calling him “Speaker Brown.” He is, actually, former Speaker Brown, the Assembly currently having a vacancy at the top. But even that has only added to the Brown legend.

Republicans, of course, counted him out, as so many have this former shoe-shine boy from Mineola, Tex. They had, after all, won 41 seats, a bare majority, in the Assembly last month, and with that came the speakership. Or so they thought. On judgment day earlier this month, all 39 Democrats cast their lot with Brown, and then--with a dramatic slap on his desk--so did Republican Paul Horcher of Diamond Bar.

The resulting 40-40 tie denied Republican leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga the speakership. It prompted Horcher to cut his ties to the GOP--he turned independent. It led his spurned colleagues to mount a recall against Horcher. And it left Brown where he so often has been in the last 14 years, smiling and figuratively, at least, in control.

He says he has offered a deal to Brulte, allowing Brown to be Speaker until July, when Brulte would assume control. But Republicans refuse to consider it.

On Thursday, he was in Los Angeles, talking with reporters and editors from The Times about the serious business of government. But first there is small talk, of the kind that always arises around Brown. No, he is not going to Orange County, to see firsthand the financial crisis that has crippled that Republican outpost. No, he is not going to Sacramento, to do the state’s business.

No, after this coffee-and-conversation, he is going Christmas shopping. But not at any mall. The Republicans may have cast his coveted speakership into limbo, the voters might have turned their noses at the liberalism he has long espoused, but Willie L. Brown Jr. is not trimming his sails. He is headed for Armani, he says with a cackle. There, he hears, he might score a deal.

Question: How in the world did you do it?

Answer: It was pure, unadulterated luck. I had nothing to do with Mr. Horcher’s decision.

Mr. Horcher came to me in early November--after the results became very clear--and he said, “If you are a candidate for Speaker, I will support you.” About six months ago, he wanted to change registration, and he came to see me, and I suggested to him that he probably could not get elected (in his Republican district).

But they (Republicans) were so nasty to him . . . . If they walked into a room of this nature, and the only seat available was next to Horcher--nobody would sit in the chair. I could not assign any Republican to sit next to him on the floor. They just wanted to ostracize him; they wanted to destroy him. It really drove him batty. He was really angry. I’ve never seen anybody as angry. And his motivations were greater than any that could be generated by greed . . . .

Now, I had trouble with my membership. That required some skill, keeping all the membership in place while so many misrepresentations were being made. Each was told they were going to be dealt with harshly (by the Republicans). I had to keep saying it is not about winning the speakership--it is really about the policy agenda . . . . You should not compromise yourself just for personal reasons. Fortunately, not one Democrat did.

Q: Where do you go now?

A: Mr. Brulte, he hasn’t hit the wall. He still thinks he can win the speakership. Apparently, the month of promising the world that he was going to be Speaker raised the level of expectations among Republicans so much so that they are irrational . . . . They generally have built themselves into the Newt Gingrich mold. They really thought they were part of the national movement; they really thought their time had come. When it became apparent their time had not come, they became really angry. They are really, really angry.

I started Nov. 10, trying to talk to Brulte. I said the chances are of a 40-40 tie. I knew of Horcher. But I said, even if it isn’t 40-40, you can’t run this place with only a one-vote majority. It’s crazy to even try to run it . . . .

I tried four more times in November to meet with him for that purpose. He would never sit down and meet with me. He would make the appointments, and then cancel them. Clearly, that was the intoxication of power. I’ve been there, so I know what guided him--but I kept pushing and pushing and pushing. I assumed that when he hit the wall, and found out that it was only 40-40, there would be an opportunity. I was wrong, absolutely wrong . . . .

Q: You seem to have set a July departure under this deal. Would that be the longest you would serve?

A: I may not serve that long. You have no clue what this job takes out of you. It’s taking more out of me. I am competing against a party. I am no longer competing against a fellow leader. I’m really competing against a party, and it’s not fun. It’s not enjoyable . . . . Their political party has made me the hate object. If any one of them wanted to be rational and reasonable, they would run the risk of being a recall victim--like Mr. Horcher . . . .

Think of the arrogance of that. I’d be sent back to Texas in a locked box if I had even attempted to treat somebody that way, period. I may very well leave long before July, if by some means that will help the institution put itself together and be productive. At the moment, I don’t think that it would.

Q: I was wondering how you interpret the results of the election--in California and nationally.

A: It says that the Democrats do not know their constituency. I couldn’t tell you anymore who the real Democratic constituency is . . . . Republicans have continued to reach their base, narrow ideological constituency, that anti-government constituency--and they do that very well. They know how to reach inside our operation with things like (Proposition) 187--which divided some Democrats.

Q: Philosophically, why not say, maybe it is the Republicans’ turn? Maybe it is time for the Democrats to step out of power and let the Republicans go in?

A: I would never do that. I would never do that even if there were only one Democrat left. I care about things. I care about choice. I care about school funding. I care about freedoms that you enjoy. I don’t want this place to become a fascist state, and I don’t appreciate know-nothings doing the damage they can do.

So, I’m going to struggle even if there’s only one of me. I’m going to struggle at every turn, at every philosophical turn--no matter who is in charge.

Q: In Washington, a lot of people are talking about Pete Wilson as quite a strong potential Republican presidential nominee.

A: Wilson would be both a very strong Republican nominee and, I do believe, definitely a possible nominee. He’s doing everything you’re supposed to do to be the nominee . . . . Their agenda was not the governorship. Their agenda was the presidency. Wilson’s positioning himself. It would not surprise me, even with (Democrat Gray Davis) in the position of lieutenant governor. They will sacrifice and let Gray have it if they need to. California will be the battleground . . . .

Q: The vote in November was seen, at minimum, as a plea from voters for smaller and less expensive government. In the weeks since, you have hired several friends and associates to high-paying state jobs. You have increased the pay of at least 40 staffers by 5%-10%. How is that in keeping with what voters want?

A: (Brown asserts that his hiring authority is limited and he hires deserving candidates.) People write what I do in this regard and don’t ever focus on what my counterpart, the governor, has done . . . . Willie Brown, the lightning rod.

Q: Deserving or not, this is a state where unemployment is far higher than the national average, where the budget shortfall is expected to be at least $3 billion by next spring. Doesn’t that send a signal to voters--if you’re giving raises--that you’re not heeding the message they seemed to be screaming out?

A: Some people may interpret the voters’ screams that way. I don’t interpret the voters screams that way. I represent a district in San Francisco that voted “no” on 187, “no” on “three strikes,” that voted for Kathleen Brown, that voted to reelect Willie Brown. I did not run in Orange County--where they can’t manage their own affairs and where they wasted more money, cumulatively, for a lifetime than my 10% raises would reflect. So I’m not burdened with what the people of West Covina voted for. Their representatives should reflect that.

Q: Why are you a lightning rod?

A: I think, over the years, my conduct has contributed substantially. I am not an ordinary person by any stretch of the imagination. I work at not being ordinary. And, in that process, sometimes rub people the wrong way. You offend people. You become a character. Fortunately, I may be a character but I’m not considered a stupid character. Maybe an extravagant character--but not a stupid character. In the process, the myth begins to build and people add on to that myth . . . . If you just keep on acting the way you act, it begins to be magnified . . . .

When you think in terms of Democrats in the state, who do you want to attack--Leo McCarthy? Gray Davis? I am a statewide entity without ever being on the ballot, officially, statewide. Dianne Feinstein--(Mike) Huffington attacks her because of her friendship with Willie Brown. Everybody gets attacked because of their friendship with Willie Brown.

. . . My utterances sometimes add to that, too. I’m not always responsible. (He laughs.) I’m not always responsible, certainly, in my comments. I sometimes say things just for effect.

Q: How will the Orange County financial situation play out and what role will Sacramento play?

A: We need to do a whole re-look. We also need to strengthen the hand of the treasurer. Clearly, no constituent investment fund in the state of California at the county level ought to be able to do that without some supervision by the treasurer’s office of the state. After all, our directive to the treasurer is, “Above all else, protect the principal.” He didn’t act that way. He (former Orange County Treasurer Robert L. Citron) did, “Above all else, make money.”

Finally, we need to be available to provide some stop-gap loans where it is appropriate to keep gasoline in police cars and fire trucks, and classrooms open. We need to provide a loan quickly for that, if that is, in fact, an actual need . . . .

And the Orange County legislators, all of whom are anti-government, all of whom have been fiscally against any bailouts, whether for quakes or otherwise, are going to be in an interesting position. Can you imagine how many candles they must be lighting--hoping that crazy guys like (San Francisco Assemblyman) John Burton and Willie Brown don’t retaliate for their failure to support the sales-tax increase on a temporary basis to take care of quake damage in San Francisco? . . . . They have consistently voted “no.” I am looking forward to it.

Q: On a news program, you attributed racism for the hampering of your career.

A: Yes. I said it’s very easy for a guy in Chico to make me out as an evil person. There’s a certain amount of racism in the system--particularly in those isolated places where . . . there’s no diversity. And when someone up there says Willie Brown is evil, just look at him, you automatically get Willie Horton or you automatically get somebody who’s awful.

That makes it very difficult. It limits the constituency to which I can appeal. It limits the constituency that will give me a fair hearing. It limits the constituency that I may be able to persuade. It, in fact, comes from racism. That has severely limited my career.

I had to make the hard decision that the speakership was where I would spend my energy and my time and make my contribution. I could not even consider any other alternative that I might foresee as equal to my skills--simply because of the level of racism that exists in this state.

Q: What would you have liked to become?

A: President. I’m serious. I would certainly like to go to the natural limit of my abilities. And I don’t think that is rational and reasonable and possible, because 5%-10% of the voting population says, automatically, “no”--and I suspect, over the years, I have added to that.