Negotiating 101 and the California Budget: It Isn't Supposed to be Metaphysical

I also understand an opening gambit sometimes of being coy and not having an opening demand or offer and waiting for the other side to make theirs--especially if you think they are likely to make an initial offer that might be more generous than the demand you are likely to make--or just to feel them out. Years ago, there was an attorney I used to deal with who would offer more than I myself would normally in good faith make as my initial demand in a case. We joked around the office that it was malpractice to make a demand in any case with that generous soul--and then routinely would counter to his offer and get even more.

So, it's not entirely out of the rules of the playbook that Republicans might want the Democrats in the legislature to take the first step. The Democrats are, after all, the majority party. And actually, there are five different sets of folks negotiating in this budget--with the two-thirds rule increasing the degree of difficulty of this game--if that is what it is--involving the lives of real people. Like Noah's Ark, there are two from the Assembly and two from the Senate, and then there's the Governor.

The Governor made the opening bid with his budget released in January. This was introduced as the budget bill and then was the subject of dozens of hearings by the budget committees of both houses. The Governor's opening was then rejiggered as part of standard operating procedures in Sacramento in what is known as the "May Revise" when additional numbers are in for revenue and spending trends. So, the Governor laid out his hand--and there was scrutiny from outside folks--the highly respected and nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office and others. It was there for folks to see.

Then there's a little Kabuki where both houses engineered a rejection of the product of the budget committees so that a conference committee from both houses would be appointed to get the real work done. This has also been standard procedure in recent years--not accepted and in fact criticized by Senator Tom McClintock in particular--but still one way of getting things done.

The Conference Committee on the Budget included two Democrats and one Republican from each house. It met dozens of times, and in fact it was cordial--but Democrats could get their way on any item if they wanted to. Nevertheless, there was a fair amount of give and take and these proceedings were cordial at the least. This provided a public place to state differences, make demands, and try to resolve those differences in public.`

Because of the two-thirds rule required of the entire Assembly and Senate and the need for not only Democratic buy-in with any viable budget proposal, rather than produce a product all on its own--which could have been done for a floor vote long before the June 15 California Constitutional deadline--the committee deferred to the "Big 4" leaders of both houses. These Republican and Democratic leaders are supposed to be good about counting votes--and what it takes to get to 54 votes in the Assembly and 27 in the Senate.

The Big 4 started meeting before the June 15 deadline.

When June 15 rolled around--one of these Big 4--Assembly Republican leader Villines appeared before the Sacramento Press Club and said that a certain amount of money would have to come out of the budget--the amount he alleged was added in by the Conference Committee of some $1.2 billion dollars. He said this was a matter of dollars and cents and not of policy and it did not matter to him where the money came from--and that it was not his role to propose where the cuts occurred. He refused to say what cuts he would make.

That's a little late--at the deadline--to be playing the coy game, basically telling Democrats to come up with another proposal after the Democrats in the Conference Committee had made cuts in the Governor's proposed budget and crafting one with a larger reserve.

Villines and the other Republicans were excoriated in editorials and the press for failing to fess up to where they would cut. The Sacramento Bee ran an editorial July 13: "GOP dodge ball: Time for Republicans to offer detail on cuts." By then this whole enchilada was being negotiated in private and Republicans were not stating publicly what they were after.

Villines, recognizing that the Big 4 process was going nowhere--lending credence to what Perata and Nunez have complained about--that the Senate Republicans were continually moving the goal posts in these behind closed doors negotiations--finally cut a deal with Nunez. The Assembly got to 57 votes and did their part of the job on the budget.

Villines clearly had the authority to commit to the deal and close it.

Ackerman, either hasn't had the authority to cut deals he committed to, or his gang of Senate Republicans has been jerking his chain and moving away from positions they had committed to previously. Then there's this "unit rule," which clouds exactly who Ackerman is negotiating for. He, himself, can supply the one additional Senate vote necessary to pass the budget. But because of the agreement of Senate Republicans to not vote for a budget unless a majority of this minority agrees, he apparently does not have authority to do so.

So, there were reports yesterday that "Ackerman says there's a deal" which became "inoperative" with subsequent explanations that there were some more pesky details that need to be worked out. Many reporters holed up in the Capitol were shaking their heads and asking each other what exactly was going on.

Yesterday, after meeting with the Governor as part of the "Big 5" the sticking point from Ackerman was "equalization" involving school fund distributions--bewildering and mystifying Senator Perata who has the authority of all 25 Democrats and 1 Republican Senator, Abel Maldonado, to back up what he has committed to--the budget that Nunez and Villines had authority to negotiate. You would think that as the leader of Senate Republicans he would have worked out what he needed long before this meeting with the Governor.

But it has taken these Senate Republicans well into August to state what they were after--and only after an all night session and more time given to them by Senator Perata to put their own proposal together. No wonder Perata made that usually not necessary procedural move in negotiating the budget--asking the Republicans to come up with their own proposal and seeing if they could get Democrats to agree.

Perata and the Governor haven't smoked them out yet (although late last night one staffer who was near the smoking tent reeked of cigars). I hope we are getting close.