Gov. Jerry Brown

Governor Jerry Brown gives his State of the State address Wednesday morning, in which he will discuss the budget and other matters. We get post-speech analysis and reaction to the governor’s remarks. Did Governor Brown address your biggest concerns?

Full audio of Governor Brown's address:

John Myers, political editor for KXTV in Sacramento and former Sacramento bureau chief for KQED
Chris Hoene, executive director of the California Budget Project
Ted Gaines, Republican Caucus chair and state senator (R) representing District 1
Ellen Corbett, state senator (D) representing District 10
Jessica Calefati, politics and state government reporter for the San Jose Mercury News

  • Joe

    I wonder, is the city of Oakland still enslaved with debt from Goldman Sachs because of the interest rate swap that Jerry and his sister set up? Jerry really did a number on that city… And yet Oakland still found gobs of money to pay dirty cops to assault Occupy protesters.

    BTW if Kashkari gets into any political job, he will utterly betray the public.

  • campfiregirl

    I am pleased that Gov. Brown talked about climate change and local control. However, he should have spoken about how our building patterns contribute to gas consumption, poor health, and a lack of resilience in our communities.

  • catherine L

    Where was the reality check that full access to quality education beyond the K-12 is what will move us into the future, and the equally terrible “drought” in funding for the essential bridge to education: the California Community Colleges.

  • campfiregirl

    I’d like to see a lot more investment in local infrastructure – ground water retention, walkable streets, Main Street improvements. If focused in low income communities these projects could help with the drought, business creation, and poverty.

  • Chemist150

    Supposedly, this century has been the wettest in more than a
    millennium for California. Thus, pointing to man made climate change
    for California weather would need to include how we made it wetter in
    the first place.

    The last century could have simply been the peak wetness in a cyclic
    climate. “Could have” in the historical sense that it’s true.

    I emailed the Whitehouse when they first started the stimulus and suggested water supply projects for the stimulus. While pointing out that “stimulus” projects need to build things that help encourage growth. Growing populations need water with our without drought or climate change. It’s win-win.

    Instead my town of employment, South San Francisco, paved the highway which was fine to begin with.

    Then they burned money on a stoplight with commuter on lane that is three cars in length and immediately merges with the non commuter lane after the light and forces another two lane changes to stay on the highway. It will never be used and the light will never be turned on.

    Next, they put stop lights on the highway to highway transfer from 380 to 101 north. It will never be used.

    This place has no respect for taxpayer money. They’re spending it on infrastructure that will unlikely be of any use and only incurs future costs associated with the unnecessary infrastructure. Infrastructure should be planned with upkeep costs planned for going forward and should never require a “stimulus”. This shows the poor leadership we have.

    If they spent the money years ago as I suggested, we’d not be in this situation.

    • Joe

      The corporations who pay off the politicians want either (A) to seize taxpayer money or (B) to see it squandered.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor