Gov. Schwarzenegger Speaking at Sacramento Press Club Luncheon

GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER:

Thank you very much, John, for the nice introduction. It's great to be here again, like he said. This is the fifth time that I've been here, and I always enjoyed it, enjoyed it thoroughly. And I'm absolutely convinced that I will also enjoy today's little talk and question and answer period. (Laughter)

Anyway, first of all, before I answer some questions I just want to say that I wish I could be standing here in front of you today with the senate having passed our health care reform. But just because the senate has missed this golden opportunity and did not pass our health care reform doesn't mean that we should walk away from reforming our broken health care system. I'm as determined as ever that we're going to fix that. This is what I promised to the people of California, that we will fix our broken health care system. I think the people of California have made it very clear -- in all the polls we have seen between 60 and 70 percent of the people of California feel that our health care system is broken and that we need to fix it and we need to reform it. So I am absolutely committed to that; I just wanted to let you know.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger at the Sacramento Press Club Luncheon. Photo by Peter Grigsby, Office of Governor Schwarzenegger.

And we always knew that this is a very important issue. This is an issue that will not go away; it will get worse. I think that because of the senate vote yesterday the issue is not going to go away. We know that people in the future will have the same problems as they have had in the past. We know that there will be families, hardworking Californians that will have to live in fear that they will not get health care, they will not have access to health care. People will have to live in fear that have health care insurance that their insurance gets eventually cancelled if they have an illness. People have to live in fear that they'll go to an emergency room with their children, and they have to wait maybe for 10 hours for a doctor. That problem will not go away. And people have to live in fear that their health care costs go up by double digit numbers every year. Also, people have to continuously pay 20 percent of that hidden tax, which is around 14.5 billion dollars in California.

So all of those things that really very burdensome for the people of California are not going to go away, and it's going to get worse, and this is why we have to continue fighting for this issue. And of course we knew when I said in my State of the State Address last January a year ago that this is the year of health care reform, that we have to reform, we knew then that it will be a huge undertaking. Because if it would be easy, we would have had health care reform already 60 years, because Earl Warren 60 years ago tried to reform health care in California, and he couldn't get it done. And of course Governor Romney worked on it for three years, and finally after the third year he got it done. And the federal government has been literally working on that for almost 100 years. In 1912 Teddy Roosevelt talked about universal health care, that this nation needs universal health care. And now almost 100 years later we still don't have it. So I think that it's very clear this is a huge undertaking. We knew this, and so this is why we've got to continue working on this. I have absolute confidence that eventually we will get it done.

This is pretty much like with the infrastructure. When I proposed our infrastructure to rebuild California we faced many, many obstacles. And the cynics and the critics and everyone said this is not going to go, and it's not going to happen. And then, sure enough, it did happen. And now look at us; we are rebuilding California. We have already appropriated 8 billion dollars, and the people of California have committed themselves to 42 billion dollars of infrastructure that has to do with levees, and with water projects, and with housing, and with transportation, schools and so on, universities, buildings and so on. So it was a great commitment that the people of California have made, and the legislators, both Democrats and Republicans have made.

And the same kind of obstacles we faced when we did AB 32, when we made a commitment to roll back the greenhouse gases here in California. It was the same thing. We faced many obstacles, many ups and downs, many setbacks. But look what happened. In the end we signed AB 32, and now the rest of the world is looking at California, and we are now the example to the rest of the world of what can be done. We were asked by the United Nations to come there and speak -- I was there on behalf of California speaking of what we do here, so the rest of the world, all of those almost 200 counties, are all listening to us and looking at us and admiring of what we are accomplishing here when it comes to the environment.

So California is the leader in so many things, and I think that we can also be the leader in health care, and in showing the rest of the country that we can reform, and we can come together. So that's basically what I want to say about health care. And then I know we will have an endless amount of questions about it afterwards, so let me just talk a little bit also about the economy.

As you know, it's very important that we stimulate the economy as quickly as possible. And we were caught with this housing crisis and with the subprime mortgage crisis, and that has had a spillover effect into other areas. And so now it is important that we all work together with the federal government in order to stimulate the economy again. I'm very pleased with what President Bush has done, and that the President and the House has come to an agreement with the economic stimulus package that includes tax rebates, which I think is so important, and specifically the agreement they worked out that is for low income people, people that dream about being middle income people. It is especially for them, and I think that was a very, very good idea that they worked out.

And I'm also very excited that they raised the level from 412,000 dollars to 729,000 dollars when it comes to the federal home loan program, because California really was very disadvantaged in that area. It's one thing to have the limit in Arkansas be 412,000 dollars, but in California the prices are just a little higher than in Iowa or in some of those places. Because those places are really hot; everyone wants to live there. (Laughter) Everyone wants to live in California, that's the reality, and that's why the prices are high, so this is why it didn't work with the 412,000 dollars. So we're very happy about that, because we, our administration, sent letters to the Congressional leaders and we bombarded them, and we called and everything, and finally they went in that direction. We worked very closely with Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer and others, and so I'm very happy about that.

So the President is going to come out tomorrow; I will be spending some time with him talking about those issues, including trade, which is very important. As you know, I'm a fanatic about trade and about selling California goods overseas. And this is why I've been on trade missions, even though they don't always get the kindest write-ups from you guys. (Laughter) But nevertheless, I find them always very exciting and very interesting, because I think everyone in the world is interested in selling their products to California or taking products from California, and we have a good chance of selling our goods. And we have so many wonderful things to sell, and we are No. 1 in so many different areas. So I think trade, and to make trade easier, and to strip away barriers, is very important, and I think the President is going to come out and talk about that tomorrow, and I will be talking also a little bit about that. So we're going to spend some time together; it will be very interesting. And of course I will be using that time also to talk to him about other issues like the environment and the Border Patrol and border issues, and immigration issues and so on and so forth.

So with that, I want to hand it back to you, and ask me some questions about any of those issues, or anything else you want to talk about, as far as that goes. The first question is going to (Inaudible) what do you think about Teddy Kennedy endorsing Obama? (Applause)

QUESTIONS/ANSWERS:

QUESTION: Governor, that's an opening. That's an opening. What do you think about Teddy Kennedy endorsing Obama?

GOVERNOR: I'm not going to ask your questions. You go ahead and you do all of those things.

QUESTION: I'll take presidential prerogative.

GOVERNOR: It just shows you the power that doughnuts have. (Laughter) But anyway, go ahead.

QUESTION: I don't know how to follow that. There's another microphone in the back, if you raise your hand. And again the protocol -- give us your name an affiliation. Rich, it looks like you've got somebody back there first. We'll start with you, maybe.

QUESTION: It's Nanette Miranda, KABC in Los Angeles, KGO San Francisco. Let's stick to the presidential primary. Can you name possibly one person from each party, on the Democratic side and the Republican side, that maybe you think can get this country past partisanship?

GOVERNOR: I would not go to take one person. Well, I think that there are several candidates I think that are very good on the Democratic side, and there are several candidates that are very good on the Republican side. And I'm looking forward to meeting with Senator McCain to talk about some of the important issues; him I know very well. And I enjoy him, because he's also of course someone that believes in working on the environment, and believes very strongly that you can have a sound economy and a strong economy and also a good environment. But I think both Obama and Clinton have made their case really well, and they have been, of course, very competitive. But I think both of them seem to be good candidates. And on the Republican side Romney and McCain -- we will see what today's election will hold, you know, who is staying in and who is not. But I think there are some good candidates there.

QUESTION: Governor, we've got one right here.

QUESTION: Hi, I'm Bill Ainsworth with the San Diego Union Tribune newspaper. And my question is about Jessica's Law. You were a huge supporter of that law back in 2006, and now the Department of Corrections is starting to implement it, and they're saying that there are quite a few problems with the implementation. The one part is that they're implementing the residency restrictions on the paroled sex offenders, and what they're finding is that many of these people are becoming homeless. And while I guess some people would say, well, why is that a problem, that there are some difficulties for these sex offenders who society doesn't really like very well? But what the parole agents are saying is that if you have homeless sex offenders they're more likely to reoffend. So I'm just wondering what your thoughts are on that? And is there a chance that this thing is actually making the state less safe than more safe?

GOVERNOR: Well, first of all, I don't buy into that, what you just said. The key thing here is that many times we get into something new like that, like Jessica's Law, and then one has to look at it the first year and see what adjustments have to be made. Is it perfect? No. I think that Senator Runner knows that; I think Senator Runner is dealing with that issue. We have been talking to him about it, and also the expense of the program. When you really put bracelets, GPS bracelets on everyone, it costs a fortune, and right now the money is not available for all of those things. So I think that there are obstacles like that.

But I think that the key thing is really that it has focused on keeping our children safe. It is focused on that sex offenders should not be able to live close to schools and parks where kids are playing, and all of those kinds of things. I think all of those kinds of things are very good, and very well thought out. And if there is a problem with any of this I think corrections ought to be made. And I think that Senator Runner is more than willing to make the corrections, because the key thing is to understand that I get many times legislation sent down to my desk and we sign them with the understanding that if there is a problem, the next year we will make the adjustments. And there are many corrections every year that we make to laws.

QUESTION: Isn't that more difficult with a ballot measure, because you have to then go back to the people or get a two-thirds vote?

GOVERNOR: No, no. We will do it. I think that it's totally doable, to make those adjustments, whatever it needs. But it's mostly a financial problem right now that I see, than any other problem. Yes?

QUESTION: Julie Small, KPCC Southern California Public Radio. Governor, when you took office you said you initially favored shorter terms for legislators, and since then you've changed your mind. Can you tell us why? And if you still feel that way today after the senate defeated health care reform? (Laughter)

GOVERNOR: Very good question. (Laughter) I feel very strongly that the special interests and the lobbyists, because they have been around Sacramento for so many more years than the legislators, they have more experience and they can represent those special interests better than the politicians can represent the people of California. And this is why I said that I have changed my mind since I've been in office, and that I feel it would be better for the people of California -- much better for the people of California -- if the legislators get more experience and stay longer in Sacramento. That doesn't mean longer over a period of years. It just means that if you're in the Assembly you should be able to just stay in the Assembly and get your experience there, and work all of those things out, and learn and so on. The same is with the senate, you can stay in the senate, because the amount of years is actually shortened from 14 years to 12 years. Yes, please.

QUESTION: Hang on, George, I'm coming. This is like my Phil Donahue moment.

QUESTION: George Skelton, LA Times. Is there anything about the present, or the killed health care plan, that you would like to preserve and maybe make some incremental steps, instead of making the big comprehensive program, waiting and doing that? Or would you just do children, for instance, or would you do requirement for 85 percent patient care, that kind of thing?

GOVERNOR: Well, first of all, it's a good question because normally that's what you would do. But in health care we have found that it doesn't work, because what happens is, if you take on health care reform in incremental stages, in incremental ways, the whole thing is so interconnected. For instance, let's take children. You go and you take out the children. You say it will cost 500 million dollars to insure the children. Where do you get the 500 million?

We, in our proposal, have put together a pot of money which was 14.7 billion dollars that we knew, with shared responsibility, we can raise that money and get that money, which was through the hospital administration and through the tobacco tax and through employers' responsibility and individuals, and the state, and the federal government with its matching funds, and so on and so forth. So a part of that money was for the children, as much as there was part of that money for prevention, and a part of that money for Medi-Cal, 4 billion dollars for Medi-Cal, and on and on and on.

And our package also increased the risk pool, so therefore you can go to insurance companies and say, now, since you have a bigger risk pool, you've got to go, by law, insure everyone. And you can't cancel anyone anymore. Because we want to make sure that no matter who it is, if you're 80 years old or if you're 20 years old, that you get insurance. We wanted to make sure that no matter what your medical history is, that you can get insurance.

So those things are interconnected. So when you do it in fragmented ways and piecemeal it, then it becomes kind of the special interests going to say, I'm going to go lobby now the legislators to change this one thing that really will benefit me, and no one else. And that is the problem that has been, in the history of health care, it all has been done incremental, and so what you have now is a mishmash of different things that ends up being disastrous for the people of California.

But if there would have been a way, of course I would have gone that way. But we saw it, as we got in there, we saw how interconnected it all was, and the more and more experts we talked to on the national level and on the state level all said you've got to do the whole thing over, rather than just trying to do the piecemeal approach. So that's why.

But to answer your other question which you had, should we throw out this whole thing now because it didn't work in the senate? No. Let's assume for a second that means that we're not 100 percent there. Someone in the senate thought that we're not 100 percent there, or several. Whoever it was felt that, otherwise they would have passed it. So I just say, okay, let's go back. Let's go back to the Senators, let's go back to the Assembly, let's bring all the stakeholders together.

Because I tell you one thing, that it is remarkable of what I have witnessed this last year, the way people came together that were way on the right and way on the left. I mean, there were labor leaders that all of a sudden threw out that idea that they would never vote for anything that has to do with mandatory health care insurance, with individual mandate. And they changed, and they came to the center. It was wonderful to watch the business guys agree to a certain fee. It was wonderful to see the Hospital Association say okay, put a fee on us. We're more than happy, because we are going to benefit if this is reformed. So there were tremendous changes by everyone, by advocate groups and by doctors, by the Hospital Association, by labor leaders, by business leaders, by everyone coming together. That was really amazing. So I'll try to keep that together and just iron out, and see what the problem was, look at that list of things that they had a problem with and then continue on working towards it.

And I think that all of you are a very important component of this, because the more you talk about it is absolutely necessary not to give up, it is absolutely necessary to continue on, and to look at that as a marathon run and that is the last mile, and we've got to do it -- because otherwise you get into a situation where we have already read today that one of the Senators said, "You know something? It doesn't really matter, because hopefully we will have a Democratic president and then he will maybe, or she maybe, will do it. (Laughter).

See how I immediately corrected myself? (Laughter) Because imagine now tonight at 5:00 o'clock in the evening by wife sits there with this homework with the kids. She switches channels, and all of a sudden she sees me only say "He." It would have been disastrous. So I immediately made the corrections and fine tuned it all.

Anyway, so the key thing is that someone said the president will do it. Hopefully it will be a Democratic president and then they will take on health care, and that will then take care of everything. That's the wrong way of thinking, because what we are saying then is that we in California cannot do it, that we have to wait for Washington to babysit us, to teach us how to do it, when in fact it is the states that are supposed to teach Washington how to do it. We did not wait when we did our environmental issues, fighting global warming, AB 32. We are teaching Washington how to do it. We didn't say, well, we can't get it done. Let us have Washington show us how to do it. No. We want to lead. The same is in stem cell research. California moved forward and said we're not going to wait for this administration. We are going to do it. And the same thing should be in health care. We show the rest of the nation that we can do it. And we should show to Washington that we can do it, and here, copy us.

I think this is what you should do, is put the pressure on the legislators, Democrats and Republicans, to move forward and not to give up.

QUESTION: One follow up on health care. Did you learn anything from this? Is there anything you would have done differently, or would do differently next time?

GOVERNOR: You know, it was a learning process, because I did not come in to this as a health care expert, trust me. So it was to me -- I knew when I came into office that I want to take on big issues that everyone said are impossible to do. And I said to myself, you know, why give up? Why just say it's impossible, and never tackle those issues? If it is infrastructure and rebuilding California, if it is the stem cell research, if it is redoing our Workers' Compensation reform, or any of those things -- health care was one of those things that I said to myself, "It's crazy that we have 6.7 million people uninsured, and we give up, and we say well, no one has been able to do it, so let's give up." So that's why we tackled it. And I went in there not knowing much about it at all. Just I had the will that we've got to get it done. And so as time went on and I started meeting all the experts, and we had meeting after meeting, and hundreds of meetings, I learned. And as this learning process went on I learned to make certain changes, and consider other things. Other people came on board, and there were a lot of stakeholders that came in and said have you ever thought about this, have you ever thought about that? And it was wonderful.

And I tell you, I want to compliment one person right off the top, before I forget, and that is Speaker Núñez. Because I tell you something, that guy was a jewel. He believed passionately, and he believes passionately, in health care reform. He sees, and he always painted this wonderful picture of the poor people that he represents that don't have health care, and he wants to get health care for them. It was wonderful to work with him. And here's like a situation, a Republican working with the Democrat -- again, a very unusual situation, as a Republican governor to be interested in this kind of reform, and in that way, to reform it in that way, and to go beyond the party principles, but to go just according to the people's principles, and to work with him on that. And we met in the middle. And so I want to congratulate him and I want to thank him for all the great work that he has done for the whole year of working with me, and working with the stakeholders, and bringing all of his constituents in there, and so on and so forth. Without him we wouldn't at all have gotten there.

Yes, please.

QUESTION: Governor, Kevin Riggs from KCRA.

GOVERNOR: Yeah?

QUESTION: Back to presidential politics. Sorry to be so predictable, but I have to ask you what you do think of your uncle-in-law's endorsement of Barack Obama? And secondly, have you been noticeably absent on the presidential campaign trail in part because you are truly conflicted about who to support?

GOVERNOR: First of all, I'm not conflicted. (Laughter) I have my favorite. No. 2, what do I think about Teddy endorsing? I think that I'm not surprised, I wouldn't have been surprised if he would have endorsed Hillary Clinton, and I'm not surprised that he endorsed Barack Obama. What is surprising is that, I think for the first time, the family is not in sync. Three of them have endorsed Barack Obama and three of them have endorsed Hillary Clinton. I think that's the interesting story there, and why that is, and so on and so forth. So to me that was interesting, when I saw that unfolding this week.

QUESTION: Governor, there's one right here, right beside you.

GOVERNOR: Sure.

QUESTION: Governor, Bob Fairbanks, the Capitol Morning Report. I notice that the California Teachers Association has already started radio ads against the budget proposals that you made. Are you ready to go out and start raising money again for a big campaign yourself, to get through what you want to do in the legislature?

GOVERNOR: Well, there is no initiative that is on the ballot that has to do with that issue. So therefore I think that the teachers union and the education coalition do what they need to do in order for the legislators now when they get into the budget to focus on it and to say, "Don't touch us," and all of those things. So there will be various -- they will not be the only group. There will be other groups coming out and saying don't touch us, and don't touch us. And then by the time we are through with the whole thing you're not supposed to touch anyone, and you're supposed to have a 14.5 billion dollar deficit. So it doesn't work that way. We all know, and I have made it very clear to the CTA, that it is painful to make this decision, and to make the decisions on making those cuts, if it is education, because it really kind of screwed things up a little bit, because I wanted to really get in there and do education reform. And in the meantime now I'm told that we are 14.5 billion dollars short.

And the same is with health care and the same is with other issues, if it is law enforcement, with prisons -- we had this whole plan about prison reform and about rehabilitation and all the things we were going to do in the prisons, and then all of a sudden we have to also cut there 10 percent. Law enforcement, 10 percent, education, higher education, all of those things. So it's tough.

But I think that it just shows to you, and it shows to the people in California, of how important it is that we reform our broken budget system, because that's something that we can fix very easily. All we have to do is just put a rainy day fund aside.

When you look at these charts here -- and this is why I brought them -- it is just -- it's very easy to see the problem we have. This is revenues, the green line, and it's totally on its own. And then you have the yellow line, which is spending. It has no relationship with each other at all. What we have to do is, we have to bring those two lines together so that when we have an increase in revenues, unusual increase in revenues, we put a rainy day fund aside. And then we have money when the economy goes down.

Here it shows you what will happen if we would have a reform, if we would have had reform 10 years ago. So I think if we have -- if we take, for instance in 1999 we had this surge in revenues. If we don't take all that money and spend it -- because you can do that too at home. Sometimes you will have more money, especially if you're in business, sometimes you will have more money, and then other times you don't have as much money. So it's always good that when you have a lot of money, you have a good year, you put some of that money aside so when things go down that you have it to supplement. So we don't have that in this state. We each time we make more money, we grab all of that money and we spend it. And we promise everyone in California everything. We say, "This will stay up like that, those revenues. We guarantee you, we can keep spending that amount." When in fact, the next year the economy goes down, and all of a sudden it flattens out, and now people expect this increase and they don't get it, and then all of a sudden it's cuts. So we go through that all the time.

So what we need is, we need a rainy day fund, we need a reform where we put a rainy day fund aside so when the economy goes the way it is now -- and may I remind you, again I want to reiterate what I said in my State of the State -- the economy is not, things are not going down, our revenues are not going down. They just have flattened out from a 6 percent increase that was anticipated to a 1 percent increase. But it's still an increase. But imagine now, people expect us to actually increase our spending by 7.3 percent. that's what the spending formulas require us to do, and that's what will cause us the problem.

So we have some leftover stuff from last year. What we did was, when we had the surge in revenues in 2005, I took a lot of that money and paid off the debt, because I knew we should not go and commit it for ongoing spending, because otherwise we get into deeper trouble. So we started paying off from previous years the transportation that was taken money from, transportation and from other areas -- we paid that off, and also our Recovery Bond money, Economic Recovery Bond money, we also prepaid, we paid early, because I knew that if we take all of that money for ongoing spending that everyone would think this will continue like that, but it's not.

So this is why, when you see a line like this -- when you see this, you can see clearly that we are going to continue separating those two lines, that the spending line and the revenue line. So there is no indication that they ever come together. This is why I say we can't tax our way out of this problem, because it means this is a difference of 10 billion to 12 billion dollars every year. So we've got to correct it. We've got to bring the yellow line down to this line. That's reality. that's what you have to do at home, that's what every working person in California has to do, is live within your means. And that's what we have to do, as tough as it is. But I think that everyone in the Legislature is getting the point now, and I think that when Democrats and Republicans come together, as tough as it is -- as I've said many times, I hate to make those cuts.

But, you know, that's the only way we can do it, because what we have done in the last four years is, we have tightened the noose. Because what happened in the previous administration -- and in previous administrations, I should say -- is that whenever they ran out of money, or whenever the budget was off, they stole money. They grabbed money from transportation, they grabbed money from local government, they grabbed money from pension funds, and from all over the place. And then they borrowed. Well, now with Proposition 58 we cannot borrow anymore for ongoing programs. Then, because of Proposition 42, we cannot steal anymore money from transportation. And because of Proposition 1A we cannot steal and rip off anymore local government.

So we tightened the noose. Why did I want to tighten the noose? Because I knew that eventually the problem will come again, because as you know, every five years we go through this cycle. I mean, since I have been in this country I have witnessed it six, eight times, going in these ups and downs economically. It just happens. It doesn't matter what the administration is; it's just a cycle we go through. So since we know that we have this cycle, let us prepare for it. Let us prepare for it with a rainy day fund. That is the idea. And so now we have to face the music.

QUESTION: Governor, we have a question back here.

GOVERNOR: Yes, please.

QUESTION: Venus Stromberg, Capitol Television News Service. And

how was it that the big four tribes from Props 94 through 97 were able to negotiate for so much more slot expansion than other tribes did in prior compacts?

GOVERNOR: Well, because they gave us the money that we asked for. You know, it is all about that. We said we want 15 to 25 percent, according to how many slot machines you have. If you have an increase in slot machines and go beyond 1,000, whatever the amount is, you go up to 25 percent. And so there were four strong tribes that had the money, and they said okay, that's the commitment we want to make. Because I'm interested in one thing, and one thing only, that:
A. The Indian gaming tribes pay their fair share, and

B. That we in California get the money, because we need the money.

And this is 9 billion dollars -- 9 billion dollars over the next 20 years that will come to the State of California. And when we are finished with all the negotiations, with all the tribes -- because we're not finished yet -- it will be approximately 22 billion dollars that we will get over the next 20 years. So that is more than a billion dollars a year. With that we can educate a lot of kids and pay a lot of police officers and firefighters and all this, and that's what I'm interested in, for them to pay their fair share and for us to get the money.

QUESTION: Governor, to your right back here. And we've got time for just a couple more, folks.

QUESTION: I'm Jake Henshaw at News Service. What's your position on Proposition 92, the Community College Initiative, and why?

GOVERNOR: I hope that everyone votes no. That's the last thing we need, is to commit ourselves to another one of those things where we are locked in with the automatic spending thing, and we cannot keep that promise. So I think that we need to go and let the legislators and the governor do the budgeting, because otherwise we're never going to end up with anything, because we have to undo a lot of things that we have done in the past. Yes? Can you fly over here with the mike?

QUESTION: Sorry, hold on.

GOVERNOR: You're very slow today, since you have a new baby.

QUESTION: I know.

GOVERNOR: You don't get enough sleep. Let's give a hand for the new baby. Come on, now. He's doing a great job. (Applause)

QUESTION: She'll be very pleased.

QUESTION: Thanks, Governor. Mike Montgomery with the River Park Review here in Sacramento. Your friend Senator Burton is in a bit of trouble. Is this a raw deal?

GOVERNOR: You know, I really don't know what the situation is. I only read what you probably have read. And so I don't' know. I just know one thing, and this is John was always a great friend of mine, and I loved working together with him, even though he was a little crazy. (Laughter) But I understood that craziness, I understood that every so often he had to spit during the meeting, and stuff like that, and say funny things. But, you know, he had a great heart. He always has had a great heart. And even now he comes into my office. He never asks, ever, for anything for himself. Always about children, foster children, or homeless people. I mean, imagine. The guy is out of office, he's 75 -- I don't know, 75 years old, whatever he is -- and only talks about helping other people. To me, that is staggering. That's kind of like my father-in-law always has been, before he got Alzheimer's. He never talked about himself; always just about what can you do for people. It was all about public service, public service. And he inspired me, my father-in-law. But John Burton is from that class, you know? It's kind of like the old school. It's not about me, it's about you, it's about everyone that needs help, the vulnerable citizens. So I hope he gets out of this situation as quickly as possible.

QUESTION: Governor, we have -- Kevin wants to follow up with you here.

QUESTION: Just to tie up a loose end. You mentioned earlier you have a favorite in this race. Who were you talking about? (Laughter)

GOVERNOR: Man, it takes you a long time. (Laughter) Normally, you're really quick, so I'm a little bit concerned that you're slipping here. But I -- you know, maybe someday I will talk about it. But right now I'm not. So, the time will come. Okay. Yes?

QUESTION: We've got time for one more right here.

GOVERNOR: Sure.

QUESTION: I'm Tamara from KQED Public Radio. I'm wondering about the timeline for health care now. We've got sort of a budget thing going on, and there's the potential that Prop 93 could fail, and it could change dynamics dramatically. So what are you planning now?

GOVERNOR: I think we are planning -- you have to understand, we are working with the whole 120 legislators. So we know, and everyone knows my preferences, if everyone stays in place, the leaders stay in place and all of those things, because we have now gotten to kind of trust each other and work together, and we have created a good working relationship with Republicans and Democrats. But I also understand that there might be a change. So I work with the whole building. In the end, to me, my responsibility is to the people of California, and I will do everything that I can to get the budget reformed. I will do everything I can to go and get health care reformed, and all the other things that need to be done, and to make sure that we continue building.

And I just want to mention that to everyone here. It's very important that we continue rebuilding California. Let's not look at this as on ongoing crisis. What we face here with the budget, and what we face here with the economy, is a temporary bump in the road. It's not a permanent thing. Therefore, let's not lose sight that we've got to build for permanent things. We've got to fix health care. We've got to go and rebuild California. We've got to build more roads. We've got to build more university buildings, we've got to build more classrooms. We've got to continue fixing our levees.

There is billions and billions of dollars -- in my State of the State I said we need, literally, in the next 20 years, 500 billion dollars of infrastructure. The simple reason is because for the last four decades we haven't done anything to rebuild for the population growth, and it is staggering when you see it in front of you, that we really have infrastructure in some cases for only 18 million people.

Like in water. Our water infrastructure is only for 18 million people. We cannot guarantee you today that we will have enough water in 20, 30 years from now, so when you turn on your faucet that there will be water coming out. It is crazy. That's why I said that we should go and start building and fixing the Delta once and for all, and its ecosystem. That it's important that we build new water delivery systems and above and below the ground water storage, and really work on a comprehensive rebuilding of the water system, so we have water for 50 million people. Because by the time the water project is over, by the time it's built -- which takes 15 to 20 years, we will have 50 million people in this state.

So we've got to think big, which is very challenging in Sacramento, may I remind you. I think big. And people are used to thinking and doing things in incremental stages, and in little stages, which is okay. But we've got to expand, because we have not done the things that we needed to do for so many decades. We've got to go and start thinking big in order to really jump ahead, because California is operating only at 8 cylinders out of 12 when we talk economically, let's face it. Because we cannot get goods and people around the state fast enough. Everyone gets stuck. And the economic power is how fast we get people and goods around the state. And this is why it is so important that we think about the infrastructure and that we make a commitment and continue making the commitment to invest in the future of California.

With that I'll say thank you very much listening, and I'll be back. Thank you very much. Thank you. (Applause)

judythpiazza@newsblaze.com

   _   _