Wilson’s Agenda Hits Wall in Legislature : Politics: Three proposals governor has championed are rejected by lawmakers. Some blame his fledgling presidential campaign.

Three of the major proposals that Gov. Pete Wilson has championed both in his presidential campaign and in California were rejected in the state Legislature last week by lawmakers who charged that the governor’s package is designed more for show than for passage.

Wilson’s proposal to reduce state income taxes--a central component of his plan to boost the state economy--lost its first legislative test in an Assembly budget committee Monday. Later, two other committees shot down the governor’s attempts to sharply scale back the state Endangered Species Act and to unclog the courts with a series of tort reforms.

Wilson aides said the actions were a “short-term setback” and that they still expect all three to pass, although possibly in a compromise form. But the votes were another spot of bad news for a fledgling presidential candidate who doesn’t need more of it.

Wilson is still canceling appearances because his raspy voice has not recovered from minor throat surgery more than a month ago. And the governor’s aides are scrambling to assess the political damage regarding Wilson’s recent admission that he probably employed an illegal immigrant as a housekeeper in the late 1970s.

“He’s had some minor setbacks which are not devastating, but nothing good has happened to project Pete Wilson as a major (presidential) player,” said William Schneider, an independent political analyst in Washington. “He needs something to grab attention. Losing the tax cut in the Assembly is small, but it’s not a plus.”

Wilson began his second gubernatorial term in January by introducing the most ambitious legislative package of his tenure. In a stirring State of the State speech, he predicted that his ideas would pass because voters demanded change in November by supporting a Republican landslide.

But in Sacramento, the GOP gains stopped just short of ousting Democrats from control of the Legislature. So far, instead of sweeping change, the narrow balance of power in the Capitol has only resulted in more gridlock.

In the Assembly, the two parties are almost evenly split, with 39 Democrats, 38 Republicans, one independent and two vacancies. One reason Wilson aides said they are still hopeful their legislation will someday pass is that many of the bills--like the tax cut--lost in committee by a single vote.

“Time is on our side,” said Sean Walsh, spokesman for the governor. “We cannot stress enough that the dynamics of the Legislature are going to change.”

But in the Legislature, Wilson critics said the votes are a harbinger of things to come.

Even if the bills squeaked through the Assembly, they said, hostile Democrats still control the Senate. Some also charged that Wilson’s bills are too extreme to attract swing votes needed for passage.

Finally, observers say both sides are using the governor’s bills to play presidential politics, with Democrats unlikely to cooperate in granting Wilson a platform.

“The climate is poor for significant changes,” said GOP consultant Sal Russo. “It would be great (for Wilson’s presidential campaign) to be able to talk about using California as a laboratory for the nation. But that’s not going to be a luxury that Wilson has.”

The most important proposal for Wilson’s White House bid is the tax cut. In almost every forum since he announced in March that he was forming a presidential committee, Wilson has been forced to defend his support for a major California tax increase during his first term.

In January, Wilson proposed a 15% cut in California’s personal and corporate income taxes to be phased in over three years. And in Washington recently, Wilson said he will put the issue on the November, 1996, ballot if the Legislature fails to pass it.

Wilson advisers say the $7.6-billion cost of the tax cut over the next four years could be offset by California’s growing economy.

But at a Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee hearing Monday, the state’s nonpartisan legislative analyst warned that the governor is assuming too much from the state’s economy. Democratic opponents also said the tax cut is unwise at a time when the state is about $2 billion in debt.

The tax reduction lost by one vote, with all five Republicans on the committee favoring passage.

As with the tax cut, Wilson has used his effort to rewrite the Endangered Species Act on the presidential campaign trail to appeal to conservative voters. The law has been widely attacked at the state and federal levels by industry, agriculture and others who say it is inflexible and unfairly burdens landowners.

The bill Wilson sponsored would make it more difficult to declare a species endangered, and would “delist” all endangered species by 2001 unless there was “clear and convincing” evidence that protection is warranted.

On Tuesday, the bill was rejected, 6 to 4, by the Senate Natural Resources Committee after opponents--including five members of the clergy who accused Wilson of “playing God”--warned that it would gut protections for California’s imperiled creatures.

Observers said there was some sentiment in the Senate for changing the Endangered Species Act. But the bill was “so radical, it seemed to have more to do with presidential politics than with reality,” said John McCaull of the National Audubon Society.

Some blamed the governor’s office for not doing more to pass the measure he sponsored, which was carried by Senate Majority Leader Ken Maddy (R-Fresno).

One legislative official said the governor’s office did little lobbying in support of its plan. “They didn’t work the halls,” he said.

Critics of the governor made the same charge in connection with a series of bills that failed last week in the Assembly and Senate regarding tort reform.

“If the governor’s office spent any time trying to get them passed, I didn’t see it--and I’m the swing vote on the committee,” said Assemblyman Phillip Isenberg (D-Sacramento). “It was written more for show than for passage. I’m a politician. I’m not opposed to show. But if this was supposed to be the vision of Pete Wilson for America, I would think he would work harder on it.”

Wilson aides insisted that they did work hard to pass the governor’s legislation, citing a number of expert speakers they recruited for hearings and the private briefings they offered lawmakers. Walsh, the governor’s spokesman, also denied Isenberg’s charge, contending that Wilson aides briefed both the assemblyman and his staff on the tort reform bills.

In the Assembly Judiciary Committee, members voted against four measures that sought to limit punitive damage awards, make it harder to sue manufacturers for product liability and allow penalties for those who bring frivolous lawsuits. Their counterparts on the Senate side also rejected three tort reform bills.

Supporters of the legislation charged that they lost because the outcome was influenced by trial lawyers, who contributed about $1.5 million to California candidates last year, mostly Democrats.

Despite last week’s legislative losses, Wilson aides said the governor has been successful on a number of important bills recently.

Walsh said the governor’s office played a major role in helping pass half a dozen bills to help Orange County resolve its fiscal crisis.

And, most significant, the governor’s office boasted about a series of education reform bills that passed in an Assembly committee. The most significant bill to pass the committee would institute merit pay for teachers.

Finally, the Assembly Public Safety Committee approved a bill that would allow authorities to deny parole to sex offenders who fail a mental evaluation.