tv Edmund Brown at California Gubernatorial Candidate Forum CSPAN November 5, 2016 10:00pm-10:59pm EDT
as we look back to 1966 campaign for governor of california, incumbent democrat cap brown was challenged by republican ronald reagan. the gas electric company into unions representing pg&e employees hosted forums of each candidate. we begin with mr. brown's appearance on november 2, 1996 at the pg&e auditorium in san francisco. he argued the case for reelection answer questions from employees. comes does us courtesy of pacific gas & electric and the hoover institution archives. and one hour, you can see republican challenger ronald reagan's appearance the very next day, just after days before the 1966 election. four days before the 1966 election. ♪
mr. gerdes: good morning, fellow employees and guests, and welcome to another session of politics 66. this is a very special day in this series. for one thing, it is the last wednesday before the second tuesday in november. stretch.is in the home this is also a special day because one of the busiest men in california is here to address us. i refer, of course, to governor brown. he needs no introduction to any
californian. moreover, we need no introduction to him. he is familiar with this program of hours, having appeared before us four years ago. he might be interested in knowing, however, that to date we have heard addresses by both candidates for state treasurer, controller, attorney general, and lieutenant governor. governor brown, there are four sponsors of this program, which is designed to help pg&e employees see and hear from candidates of both parties and to understand the issues. tenetwe feel, is a basic of responsible citizenship. the four sponsors are the company, our employees' association, and the two unions who represent pg&e employees.
the sponsors are represented today by those who share this platform with us. the long andbout distinguished career of the chief executive of our nation's most populous state. it has been my pleasure to know pat brown during most of his career. he and i became attorneys in san francisco at about the same time. in fact, he beat me to the bar by one year. he has kept well ahead of me since that time in all respects except 1 -- i have an easier time getting reelected that he does. [laughter] first was: pat elected to public office in san francisco. he defeated the longtime incumbent matthew brady and became district attorney of san francisco. his record and the prominence he
gained during eight energetic years of service as district attorney propelled him to statewide office in 1950, when he was elected attorney general. he was the only democrat to win a state office in that year. four years later, he was reelected attorney general in the primary when he won the nominations of both parties. in 1958, he was swept into the governor's office by a margin of more than a million votes. he carried with him -- with one exception -- a full slate of constitutional officers and also democratic control of both houses of the legislature. in 1962, he was elected to his second term as governor. vote, i important believe, that he ever won was way back in 1930 when bernese
lane, a university of california coed, said aye to a proposal of then counselor brown. she became his first lady long before she became hours. -- became ours. they have reared four find children, they have eight grandchildren, and they have a son who recently graduated from your law school. the governor's mother continues to reside in san francisco, and i'm told keeps a loving but discerning eye on her distinguished son. it is a great personal pleasure for me to present his excellency, governor pat brown. [applause]
gov. brown: thank you very much, bob, for a very gracious and complete introduction. my fellow californians, there are one or two other places where we differ and holding our respective offices as the president of this company and the governorship of the state. he gets a bigger salary than i do, too. [laughter] gov. brown: i would like to ask you a question, bob. i think it is somewhat pertinent to this. it is easier for you to get reelected, but do you think that a person completely without any in the pacific gas & electric company or any other electric company, in the event you decided to retire, all to be put in your place -- ought to be put in your place? i have a feeling you would take a look around, particularly if it were a motion picture actor
who had never worked a day in a public or private utility in his entire life. i think this is a very good argument that i might sit down with right now. but let me just say one or two other things. itee over here on the side reads, listen, read, think. study the issues and candidates and vote intelligently. i want to thank you, the employee groups, and you and management that have made it possible for me to come back here to the pacific gas & electric company. the first job i ever had was in the complaint division of the pg&e at 445 sutter street right after i got out of high school. i was going tonight's law school at the same time, and i worked for the pacific gas & electric company for two short of time. instead ofell, running into a tough fight for governor for the state, i might be sitting here today just taking it easy as the president
of one of the great corporations of america. [laughter] gov. brown: one other thing. you run into some awfully tough bob very nicely mentioned my wife of 36 years. we celebrated our 36th wedding anniversary on sunday. but you run into tough questions in a political campaign. i understand after this is over, i'm going to answer questions. you never know what people will ask. we had a telethon in fresno the other night. i was on the telephone answering the questions, and we were taking them, believe me. there was no censorship, they were not throwing me softballs. i took them all as they came. whenever questions that somebody asked me, governor, they say you any sex appeal, and that your opponent has charm and will get all of the women's vote.
what is your answer to that? my wife was sitting right beside me up there. i said, i am not going to answer that, i'm going to let my wife answer that question. well, girls, let me just say this -- [laughter] gov. brown: she said, i categorically deny that he has sex appeal. and then she went on with the answer where she stated, let me say this. grandmother, and and the women of the state of california are not going to vote on charm or sex appeal. they're going to take a look at the basic issues of this education, consumer problems, roads and freeways, parks and beaches -- and they are going to make a decision based upon that. that is my opinion, too. i think the people of this state are intelligent enough to make the tough judgment they are going to have to make tuesday, november 8.
i welcome this opportunity to address you, and i thank you for it. type on it will be here tomorrow, and he will have the last word -- my opponent will be here tomorrow. ordinarily, that would give him some advantage, but it has worked differently in this campaign. my opponent has been auditioning for the job of governor for more than a year now, delivering day after day from podium after podium what has become known to the press of the state as "the speech." that is what they call it. it is so well known to reporters that many of them are able to recited along with my opponent. whenven offer corrections he occasionally misses a line or strays from the script. if my opponent runs true to form tomorrow, if he gives you another version of the speech, it's theme will be that the sky is falling in california, that conditions are terrible, business is bad, and only he --
a motion picture actor -- can hold it up. he can be expected to take off a string of non-statistics and non-fax designed to prove his point -- and non-facts designed to prove his point. he will tell you there are ominous cracks in our california economy. i tell you today that our economy is the most dynamic in the nation and that california has never been more prosperous. but don't take my word for it. look instead at the business trend indicator published on the pacific gas & electric company. it describes more graphically than any words of mine the dimensions of booming prosperity. take a look at 1959 on this graph. if you look at almost every single solitary one -- service, finance, general, average weekly ,arnings come all the way up
department store sales, real estate activity -- we have had some trouble in that one, but that is the only one. bank deposits, personal income of residence -- look at the way that has skyrocketed in the last seven years. commercial industrial power sales, but at the way they are going up. taxable gasoline sales that indicates the number of people on the road. in every single solitary of business conditions that tell whether or not california's economy is good, it is proven that we have done a good job. no, i don't take credit for that as governor of this state. i say of course that great corporations like this have played its part. little corporations, little business, laborers played its part in the economy of the state and giving a full day's work for a full day's pay. the government, too, the fiscal policies of an administration. this has played a part, and this
is the reason that employment, personal income, sales, profits, pharmacies, tourist spending, and nearly every other index are the highest level in the history of the state and the highest in history of this nation. if my opponent runs true to form, he will tell you tomorrow that whoever crosses the border into california is immediately eligible for welfare benefits. i tell you that there are stringent residence requirements for every category of welfare in the state of california, every category of aid but one. they range up to five years. for the elderly, you must live in california for five of the last eight years in order to get the pensions we given the state of california. the single exception is aid to the blind. as soon as you become a resident of the state of california, if you are blind -- totally blind -- you are entitled to the aid we given the state. but i tell you that only amounts
to 1% of the total receiving welfare benefits in this state, and i have never heard a single solitary republican or democrat in the legislature ever try to change the benefits that we are giving to the blind in the state. but don't take my word for it again. if you want the facts, i invite you to examine a copy of report released this week in san francisco by the california association for health and welfare. this is a 65-year-old nonpartisan organization of lehman and professionals -- of laymen and professionals. its report will give you the facts about welfare and will point out that state-sponsored rehabilitation and training programs are taking thousands off relief roles and saving taxpayers millions of dollars. please believe me when i tell you that the whole thrust of my administration has been to get people off those welfare rolls and get them to work. and we started three years ago.
thecoming into california, 600,000 people that come within our borders every year, a great many of them are completely uneducated. great many of them cannot read nor write. you have to start with basic education before they can get the most elementary of jobs. is thefornia too, now most sophisticated state in the entire nation with respect industry and location. and then we have to retrain them. become completely untrained. this is not an inexpensive process, but california is doing more than any other state in the union. we have worked with private individuals. in southern california, we worked with john mcclellan to get them to work. the department of employment, social welfare, private industry, working together trying to solve this problem. if my opponent runs true to form tomorrow, he will be extremely careless with the fact. that is putting it as charitably as i can.
what i'm trying to do today is to ask you to examine carefully what he tells you. if you tells you what he tells people all over the state, that you have to be five years a resident of california in her to be governor, but it only takes one day or one hour to get welfare -- you ask him, what category of a duly given the state of california -- other than a blind -- and i hope somebody will ask him that question tomorrow. i'm not here to give my opponent speech. if he is true to form, it will be more notable less for what is said and what is left unsaid. the fundamental question raised by the candidacy of my opponent is still unanswered less than a week before election and a day and the since he set out to win the governorship. the unanswered question that disturbs millions of conserved is,isturbed californians
what has ronald reagan ever done for the state of california and his entire life, other than make a motion picture "the time for probation"ladies on or "last stand of custer". these are the things. while we have been building this great big state of california, its colleges in freeways, where was my opponent? that question is important, but the real question you have to ask yourself is, what would my opponent do as governor? how would he exercise the power and prestige of governor? the acts and decisions of governor of california directly affects the lives of you here today, all of the 19 million plus souls in this state. how would my opponent at? what would his decision to be, if he should ever be in a position to execute them? this is the disturbing question that every california voter must
answer as best he can before he enters the voting booth. my opponent, i repeat, has never spent a single day in public office. he has never served a single day in and appointed office. he has never been before a board or commission in the state of california to fight for or against any of these things he talks about during this campaign. he has never come to grips with the challenges we face in california that are growing and changing more swiftly than any society in history. he has never been on the firing line facing day-to-day problems of governor must solve, or be faced instead by chaos in crisis. we cannot judge my opponent by his record of action in public office -- there is no such record. by his judge him instead words, by what he tells us he believes in stands for. let me give you one example of the type of problems that a governor must deal with. some of your people know this better than i.
we have this great california water project. in putting that project over, i had consultations with the people, your executives, here and in sacramento. i told them that this was not a power project. i said i believed in the private distribution of power. i believe in the public distribution of power. i think the competitive situation we have in california has been a good thing, but i told them that during the period that i was governor and building this project -- a governor has plenary power in this california water project by reason of the burns act and the department of water resources, the appointment of the director. i would ask you to ask her president whether i have not lived up to that commitment. the distribution of that water will take tremendous power load, and we have sat down and negotiated a contract. it is almost ready for signing.
it is the best example of cooperation between government and private business, the private stockholders of the state. i'm proud of that fact, that we have been able to work together, as proud of anything else i have done as governor. one other thing -- i think you know that other governors tries to build a california water project. they tried while i was attorney general. but we ran into this northern -southern california division. the people in the south were afraid that once they had invested in a great distribution --ter, they would have to that the people in the north would take the water away from them. the people in the north were afraid that if they took the water and sent it down south, that once they got it, they would never be able to get it back. as a matter of fact, we have what is known as a county of origin statute. there is plenty of water to take care of us until the year of probably 2010. it is a question of building the
project and disturbing the water where it isn't. but it was the toughest fight. in 1959.issue passed in 1960, we had the bond issue on the ballot. in the northern part of the state, they felt i had penetrator to take -- they felt i had been a traitor to send their water to the south. in 1962, when mr. nixon ran against me for the governorship, wherever i went in the northern part of the state they would , and it was rough and tough in the counties i carried by an overwhelming vote. 1964, had the floods in we had the dam up halfway. it was up just tying up to hold the water and save the city of marysville and yuba city. now they're going to call it the brown dam. [laughter] gov. brown: the point i want to make is that when you are governor, you are making decisions.
make everybody happy, you don't make anybody happy. the buck stops in the governor's office, and every time you make a tough decision, you make somebody unhappy. the appointment of a judge, location of a freeway, the building of a dam -- there is somebody that does not want it. if they were easy, the governor has nothing to do with it. that is the situation. but i have nothing -- my opponent has never had to make these decisions. you cannot afford, my friends -- you cannot afford to place a man in office that you have not any idea what he will do. have aacramento, they citizen center. because himself a citizen politician. they placed a citizen of assessor and wanted to throw the rascals out in sacramento. the assessor there is raising all the assessments from 22% to 100%, and people up there are
shocked at what the citizen of assessor is going to do. this is an example of what you buy simply because you are not happy with all of the decisions that a person in public office may make. -- i can believe his words have to base my campaign against him on three things. not against him, my own campaign. number one, on what we have done, my record. number two, the working society, the 10 point program we have promulgated. number three, the inadequacy and negative features of his campaign. if we can believe his words, he would almost certainly end the 100 year tuition free tuition at the university of california and our state colleges. to $1000 a year in the state colleges and universities. i tell you that this means slamming the door to higher education, and we have the statistics improve that in other
states where they have high tuition, some of the best students just don't go on to college. this would mean a four-year, $4000 tax on the people with family in the state. if we had to do that, if we had to shift the burden, i would say yes. i tell you in the seven and a half years, i have heard this every year, that we can't afford it. but the young man or woman that finishes state college or university over a period of 10 years doubles the income of the person that drops out in high school. as a result, they make more money, pay more taxes, by more things, pay more sales-tax, in we are able to educate those that are coming along. as long as i'm governor of this state, so far as the governor can stop it, there will never be tuition at the university of california where the state colleges or junior colleges. believe me. that should be terribly important to all of you here.
preservehe battle to recreation and park land in the state. not only does he say that we already have enough ancient parkland to meet all future needs, but last week he suggested that we might sell off some of our parkland already acquired. he got this out of some report up there in sacramento. but you know, i have been working with senator tommy kinkel and working with the president and secretary udall to build a great redwood national park. those trees up there in dell north county were there before christ walked on this earth. they are the most magnificent, beautiful things that i have ever seen. certainly we have some state park set aside for them, but we haven't enough. there will be 40 million people in this state in a short period of time. when he makes this statement, a tree is a trade, how many of them do you want to see -- a tree is a tree, how many of them
do you want to see? i cringe. i cannot conceive of any person not having a feeling for those redwoods. this is the speech he made the lumber industry thinking to cater to these people up there. certainly it is tough up there, but we will compensate the people who on that land. we will compensate them, like when we took the fairies out of business, we put the employees to work. you gave them severance pay, we took care of that situation. that in aists tell us period 10 years, redwood national park will improve the economy of encino county tremendously, substituting torres trade for the limited amount of redwoods -- a substituting torres trade for the limited amount of redwoods. and he makes the statement, a tree is a tree, how many do you want to see? other things, too, you have to measure these things.
unemployment insurance is the current -- unemployment insurance is what sustains the temporarily unemployed worker. i was making a speech in long beach and early morning breakfast. there was a man sitting next to me, the chairman. a douglas aircraft plant and then shut down in this fellow had been out of work for 25 weeks. ,id not want to move away douglas was adjusting that they would get new federal contracts and he would be right there. he said i have a boy, 16, and a girl, 14, both in high school. he said you have no idea what it does to your more out to -- what it does to your morale to be out of work. this was a period when we had large and employment in southern california. he did not want to remove away. he said he would run out of employment insurance next week. at that point, our unemployment had risen when we passed a law giving 13 additional weeks. he called me up and said during
the last two weeks, here gone back to work for douglas. he would have been on county welfare, used up all of his savings supporting his family. these are the things that show a misunderstanding of the economy of our country. 1932 when i got by the bar examinations, businesses failing all around me, people out of work, my brother-in-law a chemist graduated from stanford cannot find a job starting out. these things can happen again, but you have the cushion of unemployment insurance. and he calling it a prepaid vacation for freeloaders. his own statements that he made before he was a candidate for governor, of course. education -- i don't want any federal centralized control of education. there is none. we have had federal aid education for 10 years in these
federally impacted areas. if you ask any of the local school districts whether there is any central control of education, he says he does not want it, he calls it a tool of tierney. -- of tyranny. if we abolished federal aid or gave it back, we would have to increase property taxes $372 million a year. what about scores of other important programs my opponent cannot become acquainted with because of his total lack of experience? i know that he tries to disown some of these positions, but whom are we to believe -- the attacked well accepted programs for people in speech after speech in state after state, the candidate for governor who yields to the advice of his political public relation handlers and suddenly reverses position, and even if he changes his mind, where will
he be tomorrow? he was a left-wing democrat back in 1943 and 1944, then became a right-wing republican. now he tells us he is really a moderate after all. what will he be next month or next year? final question that californians must ask themselves before they reach their individual decisions next tuesday. it is a question that must be asked for a concerns the overriding domestic issue of our times. i want to speak to a minute about the racial tensions in our cities. , in california and across the nation. when i speak to what has become known as the backlash to those tensions, the violence that has sprung from them in our state and other states, it is no secret that the revolutionaries and the neo-revolutionaries of the new left -- the strident new left that provided the forum at berkeley for carmichael's
obnoxious remarks at the black power conference in berkeley last weekend -- are stepping up their campaign in the final days of this election. nor is their mode of a secret. the new left and the black power advocates want to promote the backlash in california. they are engaging in an open effort to defeat me next tuesday. they know that i can and will turn back their effort to turn protests into further violence and conflict in the streets. they think that my opponent cannot. if you would analyze the situation, i think you will conclude that in this one, that they are probably right. first, i was a district attorney for a period of seven years. i was the attorney general for a period of eight years. i have been on the firing line for a peer, of 20 years. i have had to cope with violence since the first days i took my oath of office as this attorney of sentences go.
-- as district attorney of san francisco. i know the tensions of men distressed and i have an unshakable commitment to law. i moved swiftly in berkeley when the youngsters sat in over there and the local people asked me to give them assistance, i sent the highway patrol over there and they were moved out and prosecuted and punished. some of those have got into the dirty speech movement. this was out of my jurisdiction, but the university suspended and disciplined the two or three extras that were involved. in san francisco several weeks ago, when you had the trouble here, find out what's on cato and mayor shelley told you about the cooperation that we had to knock that went down just as quickly as it started with no loss of life and limited loss of property. in alameda county in oakland, we did not have to do it. the attorney and mayer acted, but we were ready to move. upsettingportant and
to those extremists of the right and left who would set race , who want bloody conflict in the streets, i know there is a second responsibility, too. my administration recognizes that the ultimate protection against violence is to move to wipe out the conditions in which irresponsible men can build and use power irresponsibly to bring about when you violence. nothing my opponent has said would indicate that he shares my concern or commitment to such action. even ignores what we have already done. but we are making progress in cleaning up the breeding grounds of violence, the conditions of decades of 100 years are not changed overnight, whether it is new york or chicago or los angeles or san francisco or waukegan or cleveland or philadelphia or republican or democratic governor. i say to you that moore has been done in california than any
other state in this union. we must continue this progress for the sake of all of us, and i think that my experience qualifies me to lead in this endeavor. -- today, as alt result of our increasingly successful efforts to head off violence throughout the state, i want to call attention to our proposal i made yesterday in los angeles. one of the elements and heading off trouble in the used bay last weekend has been the cooperation ,ith local government cooperation among law enforcement, responsive leaders in the negra community, local civic leaders and city and state leaders realizing that the great majority of citizens in both the negro and white communities abhor violence. they worked together to prevent it, it's more often than not, they have succeeded. in recognition of their growing success and in equal recognition of the stresses and tensions
with which they must continue to deal, i propose that we give formal status to these cooperative efforts by creating what might be called the consoles of law and progress in every area of racial tension in the state. these consoles should be comprised of law enforcement officers, government officials, and responsible citizens from the white community, the negro community, and any other racial group involved. their leadership must be drawn to people who believe -- not in black power or white power, but in the power of democracy solve its problems through the action of its responsible citizens. the first task of this console would be to help the local officials preserve law and order, to take steps to ensure an end to violence. the second and equally important task would be to ensure we continue our progress toward a better life for all our citizens. we must not rest until we provide jobs without
discrimination for all who want to work, until we provide education of the highest possible level for all who want to learn, and until we can be certain that all of our people are truly equal before the law. it is my hope that these consoles would work to achieve these goals with renewed energy and purpose. as the consoles assist in preserving law and order, as they help to ensure a better life, they will be providing an essential framework for our own freedom. a little over 100 years ago, abraham lincoln said this -- let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father. let reverence for the law be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in the legislative halls, and enforced in the courts of justice. in short, let it become the political religion of the nation. i believe in that principle. that is the reason that i ran
for district attorney in 1943. i have followed it all throughout my life, every time i have taken a nose to uphold the laws of the state. i ask you to join me today and all other californians of goodwill and facing up to the challenge before us with a clear vision and with total dedication. finally, i ask that you search your minds and hearts before you make your decision in the privacy of the voting booth next tuesday. i ask that you answer for yourself the fundamental question -- which candidate is better equipped by experience, background, proven record of action to deal with this question or any of the others i have posed today? to which candidate can you with confidence and trust the future of the greatest date and the greatest nation in the world -- of the greatest state and nation in the world? if you do that, i haven't the
slightest doubt in the world as to the outcome. thank you very much. [applause] mr. gerdes: thank you, pat brown. as you can readily see, this is interested and responsive group for which you are hearing. you will recall our program concludes with a period of questions from the floor. to our friends of the press, i respectfully request that they withhold their questions during this period of the session, which is reserved for employees. we will follow the usual procedure. if you have a question, please raise your hand and wait for one of our young ladies to hand you a microphone. then give your name and your
department before stating your question. who would like to lead off with a question? right here? young lady in the second row here. >> i am evelyn kesterson from accounting. request that the university of california be kept out of politics in this campaign? you have three of your employees on the board of regents of which you are the chairman actively engaged in your reelection. mr. gerdes: did you hear that? would you state the question again? why did you request that the
interest in california be caps on of politics in this campaign? you have three of your 10 the 16 member of board of regents, of which you are the chairman, actively engaged in your reelection. she asked why did i have university be kept in a politics when three of the regions i appointed are actively engaged in politics. i never made a statement that the regents should not participate in the political life of their state or community. but i did not want to do was have a governor tell them how to run the curriculum or try to tell them how the administration should run. i thought that when we had the board of regents running the university, they could run it independently of the political forest that the governor might use. a governor fixes the budget of the university of california, and by threatening if they don't take certain action that he will cut down the amount of money appropriated, he can play a great part in that.
mr. reagan has adjusted three investigations of the university of california. first he wanted the senate un-american activities committee to reinvestigate again. he was turned down by senator burns. then he wanted to have them the board of-- regents investigated again, which they did, but he still was not satisfied. now he wants the former head of the cia to investigate it again. the university has been investigated to death. thing -- the thing to do is to leave the chancellor alone. they can run the university, they have made it the number one university in the world, and they don't need ronald reagan to tell them how to run it. [applause] mr. gerdes: is there another question? the gentleman in the third -- fourth row? >> i am miles from accounting.
according to various media such as "u.s. news & world report," there are potential watts herets such as in oakland. my question is, first of all, investigations after these options have occurred? secondly, why spend additional federal money instead of putting the money directly to good use? mr. gerdes: could you state your question again? >> according to the surveys of "u.s. news & world report," there are potential racial trouble spots like oakland. after the irruption here in san francisco, we have additional investigations, additional
federal and state money spent. my question is, why spend additional federal and state somethinglleviate that previous studies have party thrown out where the best conditions are? why spend money on investigations, we have had enough, let's do something about it. that is the substance of his question. let me tell you, we are. you're doing a great deal about it. we established service centers where people can come in and find the whole federal state and local services with respect to employment. we found out that in the mo cowan committee report, people did not have an automobile. they could not get to the places where there are jobs without taking an hour and a half and $.65 in fair -- fare. new transportation in their city can go out to los angeles airport, where they have a great many job openings.
we have skill centers where we are retraining some of these people that haven't any skills with their hands. great many of them have to be reeducated. we have put some 27,000 people to work in the los angeles area alone. in alameda county, we have got economic development agency to aid us and assist us. we try to gear some of our state contract to some of these areas. we are using the computer to move some of the people where there is a job service to where there is not a job service. more fundamental than that, and a great many of these homes there isn't a father, or if the mother is there, they are unable to give the child education they should get at home. most of you, if your youngster comes home at night, you can give them assistance. some of the people from other states, they just can't do it. we have what is known as compensatory education, and we're spending money and that. we have had start with the
youngsters to give them -- we startad start -- head with the youngsters to give them some assistance and a feeling of commitment in the world. government is not going to get rid of death, sickness, worry, hatred, bigotry, but we can get provide people with the opportunity. we can equalize opportunity. from thereon on, they have got to almost do it for themselves. in california, a great majority of the people who have come here have come here to try to find a new life. and a great many cases, they have left the fields. they have been fieldworkers in mississippi, alabama, texas, all, and they haven't any skills for this sophisticated state. it does place a burden. the federal government does help with its manpower retraining and development act, but it does place a burden on our schools. we have to have smaller classes, more classrooms, more teachers. that is not inexpensive.
but california is doing more than any other state in the nation. i agree we don't need more investigations, we need more work. we are going to do more in the years ahead. yes? question.: next >> [inaudible] gov. brown: in california, we lose $80 million to $90 million a year. my people coming here and work for two or three months or six months at the benefits of our schools and police, all the services, and then leave the state and don't pay anything except sales tax. we have others that just don't pay it. they are able to get away with
it. when you are working for a large corporation, you can't do it. but there are people in smaller corporations and businesses. it is estimated that we lose $80 million to $90 million -- every state except california, new york, oregon, republican governors -- have found out it increases their income $80 million or $90 million. this could be used for services for all the people. there is no valid argument against a pay-as-you-go tax now that the federal government has it. if you did not have the federal government, it does place a burden on the employer to add another space on the payroll check. but my friend -- my opponent says he wants taxes to be painful, i think that is the expression he uses. let taxes be painful. he does not have to make them painful, they are painful enough, believe me. but i do believe that these lers --'s -- these chise
a lot of them are not, you leave before april of the following year, you don't pay your tax. $80 million or $90 million would go a long way towards mother needs we have. i believe we should have a pay-as-you-go method of collecting taxes. we can hear without that might better, i think. governors are wrong too, you know. quarks bob ferguson with the claims department >> bob ferguson with the claims department. you advocated that he would attempt to remove the tax on property owners. with abby followed by reduction in state expenditures or will it be made up with other means, and if so, how? you arewn: he asked if in favor of reducing property taxes, and if so, how will you
do it? the answer to the first question is that homeowners taxes have reached a point of being too high. this is a relative term, but in most of the areas throughout the state, real property taxes are far too high. a person may have a $15,000 home, andn a $20,000 they pay on the whole thing when they only have an equity of $5,000. we feel the state should put more money into the local school districts, so i have made a proposition that we will pay 50% of the taxes under $15,000, which will be $150. this will amount to $400 million in state aid. the economist for president kennedy, who resigned shortly after president johnson took over but is still an advisor, suggested that instead of the federal subventions in the form of federal aid to education under certain criteria, that
some of these wars against poverty that we have, where they put another layer of government to administer it, that they have more confidence in the states, that they give us this money under limited criteria. there will be $6 billion to $7 billion surplus in the treasury of the united states at the end of fiscal year 1967. they are talking about increasing income taxes for the purpose of cooling down this inflationary spiral that we see around us. this will produce another 4 billion or 5 billion. the federal government has to determine, when they going to do with that. this is in addition to what they are spending on the vietnam war. -- he wasomney and i the chairman, i was the vice chairman of the governors commission -- on seeking a return of that money to the states. be much moree must
coordination in the collection of taxes at the state, federal, and local levels. what good does it do to me to not increase taxes at the state when you have to pay additional property taxes in your home? of course, you have to be careful of one other thing. if the state takes over the whole educational system, as , then everyggested local school district will be dependent on the state for their education. i don't believe in that either. i believe we have too many school districts. i don't believe in state control of education. i like the local boards of education dealing with their local problems, and i don't want to take away all of their power to take -- their power to make the judgments. the further you get from tax collection, the more liberal people get. we spend money back to school districts, then they begin to spend it more wildly, if i could use the term, than if they have to collect the taxes, believe me.
in the long run over the next 10 years, i think a great many of the present federal tax base will be returned to the states because the central government is unquestionably growing too big. any further questions? a question from the rear of the room there? >> at a satchel, purchasing and stores. i would like to know your stand on proposition 14, which i believe is the revision of the state income tax law, and proposition 16, the insanity issue. -- the obscenity issue. gov. brown: what is proposition 14? i haven't it before me.
i can't answer you on proposition 14. i have taken a position on all those propositions, but there are 16 of them and i can't member all of them. on 16, the anti-absurdity measure, i am -- the anti-absurdity measure. -- the anti-obscenity measure. $50,000 to fight hard-core pornography in the state. the supreme court's lotus up for a period of time, but in a recent case they have given us hope that we can hit these commercial purveyors of filth. i am against it. i thought it when i was attorney general and until elected. magazine outntial of business in los angeles with my aggressive prosecution. but this is an initiative measure that every good lawyer i have talked to, including my opponent tenant governor, claims is unconstitutional.
during the period it might be in the courts, no one will know what to do with respect to hard-core pornography in this state. i think that giving to us it is in the right to file a suit to compel a district attorney -- a private citizen to become the sensor of what you can read in this state, what you can listen to her seat, i just don't believe in it. i have confidence in the people of this state. i have confidence in the district attorneys that we can with this problem with a few better laws in sacramento under the new supreme court decisions. the vote no on this censorship bill. it is bad, a bad, bad law. i'm against it with all the power that i have, believe me. [applause] mr. gerdes: the governor has to leave here at 12:30, so our time
is up. he has some other commitments today, i understand. thank you very much, governor brown, for your attendance here today at this meeting. you can see by the number of people who are here that there has been a great interest in your appearance here today. we certainly appreciate the fact that you took this timeout as close as this is to the election to appear before our employee groups. we thank you very much for coming here today. [applause] gov. brown: goodbye, everybody. mr. gerdes: in closing this
>> this week on real america, we are looking back to the 1966 campaign for governor of california with incumbent pat brown and republican ronald reagan. up next, mr. reagan's appearance a day after mr. brown's before employees of the pacific gas & electric company in san francisco. here is -- he argues that it is time for a political outsider to govern california, and he soundly defeated governor brown four days later. comes tohour program us courtesy of pacific gas & electric and the hoover institution archives. ♪