But there's a lot more sailing to be done before the voyage is complete. On this week's Capital Notes Podcast, we discuss Brown's cruise so far -- from successful fundraising to a good showing in the latest statewide poll.

Anthony York of the Los Angeles Times and I also discuss this week's lawsuit filed by legislative leaders over the boundaries (or even existence) of the role for a state controller in the annual budget process.

Note that we discuss the possibility of a redistricting ruling by the California Supreme Court (as we taped this on Thursday). Guess Anthony's source was right; that ruling is due at 10:00 a.m.

A new survey finds voters disapprove of more education cuts. Is that driving support for Brown's tax hike?

But dig deeper into the poll and it's pretty clear that were it not for the linkage to schools, the Brown proposal would either be less popular... or fail to break the 50-percent barrier altogether.

The poll from the Public Policy Institute of California finds overwhelming support from Democrats and a thumbs up from 65% of independents surveyed for Brown's temporary income and sales tax hike, one he believes will bring in $7 billion a year. Even 53% of Republicans in the PPIC poll say they support the initiative.

But as several other questions in the poll make clear, it's probably not Brown's proposal that they love so much... but rather the consequences of its failure that they hate.

75% of likely voters told PPIC's surveyors that they oppose the $4.8 billion in automatic "trigger cuts" to K-12 schools should the governor's tax increase be rejected.

"There's no question that if this was just a general tax increase," says PPIC president and pollster Mark Baldassare, "that you'd have a whole different response."

And there's some data in the poll to help prove that point. 64% of likely voters (and 69% of all adults) say they oppose a sales tax increase -- and, well, the governor's plan includes a half-cent sales tax increase.

What they really like, not surprisingly, is a tax hike on the wealthy (74% of all adults, 68% of likely voters). Heck, they even support splitting commercial property tax increase protections out of the sacrosanct Proposition 13 (60% of both all adults and likely voters) -- and an initiative to do just that (PDF) was just cleared for signature gathering, though for now it's seen as a concealed weapon of labor unions in their bid to stifle fundraising for the ground zero initiative on political donations by paycheck deductions.

Undoubtedly, the governor's most liberal supporters will see that kind of poll data as proof that any one of the other tax initiatives that are out there is better than his. And Brown has yet to dissuade all of those groups from launching their own campaigns in competition with his.

For now, though, Brown gets some more good news about his effort -- one day after campaign finance documents showed his first month of dialing for dollars a successful one. In fact, his more immediate roadblock may be with the Legislature on budget cuts. Tuesday afternoon, Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg announced that hearings on Brown's budget won't begun until the middle of next month with the Senate budget hearing on the governor's proposal to shrink and cut the CalWorks program scheduled for March 1 -- the very day by which Brown's plan assumes the actual cut would have been enacted by legislators.

"California is on the mend," said Gov. Jerry Brown in his State of the State speech. (Photo: Justin Short/Governor's Office)

The governor's roughly 20 minute speech before a joint session of the Legislature was a creative cocktail that blended a defense of his tax plan, the state's need for big thinking, and -- at times, it seemed -- the very reputation of his native California.

"Contrary to those declinists, who sing of Texas and bemoan our woes, California is still the land of dreams," said Brown before rattling off a list of what makes the Golden State one of a kind.

There was a sense of urgency (or impatience) in the governor's delivery of the remarks, perhaps a reflection of the fact that his to-do list for 2012 includes everything from the budget to education, water supply projects, pensions, renewable energy, and more.

"We're on the move, we're on the mend, let's get it done," he said in his concluding comments.

(And he was literally on the move, quickly hopping a flight to southern California for two campaign events in the LA-area today and events in Orange County and San Diego on Thursday.)

At almost every turn, Brown seemed to be in a particularly feisty mood for the annual gubernatorial speech -- whether it was scoffing at "dystopian journalists [who] write stories on the impending decline of our economy" or comparing critics of California's ambitious high-speed rail project to naysayers on past global achievements from the interstate highway system to the Suez Canal.

And, with his sights set firmly on the legislators sitting in the Assembly chambers who must vote to authorize the initial voter-approved bond sale for the bullet train, Brown cut to the chase: "It is now your decision to evaluate the plan and decide what action to take. Without any hesitation, I urge your approval."

As luck would have it, less than an hour after Brown's speech, his tax increase initiative was cleared for signature gathering, helping launch his official campaign for a budget vote of the people on November 6. (And he couldn't have asked for a better official title: "Temporary Taxes to Fund Education. Guaranteed Local Public Safety Funding.")

Democrats seemed energized by the governor's comments. "It's a good start to the year, and it was a good speech," said Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg. Official responses from most Dems focused on the governor's budget ideas ("fiscally sound," "fiscal house in order," and so on).

Republicans were critical of the governor's budget priorities in general, and his tax initiative in particular. "The focus" this year, said Senate GOP leader Bob Huff, "should be to streamline government and help create new jobs."

As with so many State of the State speeches, this one often seemed aimed at the listening and viewing audience outside of the Capitol, though that audience was no doubt puzzled by his early ad-lib about the "precognition" of legislative GOP leaders. Nonetheless, Governor Brown's long resume and family lineage seemed to add authenticity to his references to the 19th century Gold Rush and passing references to who the mayor was of Berkeley in 1966.

But now, Brown must do something he hasn't done much in recent times -- take his politics on the road. Negotiating with legislators is one thing; swaying tax averse voters on the stump may be another.

Gov. Jerry Brown's competition for a 2012 tax initiative gets a little smaller. (Photo: Getty/Justin Sullivan)

But we now that they have one big thing in common: they both believe now is not the time for a ballot initiative on major tax reform. And if Brown is lucky, they may have something else in common in the days to come: a use for some of Berggruen's millions.

After months of speculation, the group of state political and policy heavyweights organized by Berggruen, the Think Long Committee for California, announced Tuesday afternoon that it would not seek to qualify a government or tax reform initiative for the November ballot.

"We recognize the practical constraints of the 2012 election calendar," says the emailed statement from the group, "and have come to the conclusion that it will take more time to perfect these proposals, eliminate unintended consequences and provide every stakeholder and everyday Californians a meaningful voice in that process."

The proposals, unveiled back in November, sought to broaden but grow the state's tax base and to create a new super committee of sorts to help vet would-be ballot measures.

It's no secret that the proposals -- crafted by a list of state VIPs for a campaign that Berggruen would help bankroll -- were one of the big players on the tax issue that Governor Brown knew he'd have to cajole to step aside in 2012. The prevailing belief among politicos is that multiple tax measures -- Brown's $7 billion income/sales tax hike plus others -- could result in an election day defeat for everyone. And Brown has made it clear that he hoped to dissuade the backers of other initiatives to step aside.

The governor's official response was short and to the point: I'll work with them on long-term reform. But it also begged the question: did the earlier statement from the Think Long group explain why Brown offered a rather quiet response?

Would Berggruen help fund the Brown tax campaign? (Photo: Getty/Johannes Eisele)

For a governor who's got an awful lot of cash to raise for a successful campaign, that's certainly got to sound promising. Brown may be able to point to his proposal's long-term realignment of state and local government (which would be funded, for now, by his temporary tax hike) as just the kind of "reform" that Think Long and its wealthy benefactor is looking for.

But if that's where things are headed, it's not being banked on by the governor's campaign. "We're soliciting support from a broad cross-section" of groups, said Brown political adviser Steve Glazer. He says the governor hasn't specifically asked the Berggruen group for donations. And truth be told, we don't know exactly how Think Long defines "reform," nor what proposed initiatives might meet the standard.

If you're keeping score at home, that's now two of the five potentially thorny alternative initiatives that Brown has been able to swat down. Two weeks ago, he persuaded the state's association of counties to suspend its initiative related to the realignment plan.

But the others are, as far as we know, still not on board Team Jerry: a millionaire's tax being pushed by the California Federation of Teachers and the liberal Courage Campaign; a broad-based income tax increase for K-12 schools written by a wealthy civil rights attorney; and the closing of a business tax break, with the cash used for clean energy projects, pushed by a San Francisco investment manager.

Things will no doubt start to solidify sometime soon. The governor's tax initiative is due to be cleared for signature gathering in 10 days, and the other measures may be ready for road testing soon thereafter.

Update 5:56 p.m. It's been pointed out to me, and importantly, that the clean energy initiative actually sends half of the money from ending the business tax break to the state's general fund, and that the clean energy financing is only temporary. Meantime, it's also worth noting that Think Long may end up financing the initiative idea offered by the group California Forward, given the connections between the two entities. We'll know soon enough.

This week's Capital Notes Podcast takes a first look at the new state budget proposal -- winners, losers, and the political challenges Brown faces in getting it passed.

Kevin Yamamura of the Sacramento Bee and I also discuss criticisms about the proposed new round of "trigger cuts," and use analogies from basketball to -- well -- Star Wars to describe the road ahead.

"We are in a box," said Gov. Brown of the state's budget woes. (Photo: KQED/John Myers)

Yeah. So much for the playbook. On Thursday afternoon, after a copy of his proposal somehow was uploaded to a state website (oops), Governor Jerry Brown quickly summoned reporters and offered up the entire 2012-13 blueprint -- one that pegs the deficit at $9.2 billion and includes some major changes and cuts to health and human services.

"The California government is under stress," said Brown in his Capitol Q&A with reporters. "We're spending, in real terms, what we were in the 70s, under Ronald Reagan. So we're doing the best we can and it is a hardship."

The $137.3 billion spending plan offers yet more controversial spending cuts, but ones that appear to be rooted in some actual retooling of existing state government practices -- perhaps a sign that Brown knows that the system, as it exists, doesn't give him as many options.

Tops on that 'retooling' list would be the welfare-to-work program CalWorks. Brown proposes to cut $1.4 billion out of the program by reducing the assistance to families that fail to meet federal work requirements. In many cases, that's a cut from four years of eligibility for benefits down to two years.

Meantime, the budget seeks an outright repeal of some state mandates on local government, a savings of $828 million. Many of these mandates, from rules about abandoned pets in animal shelters to government meeting notices, have been suspended in recent years... necessary, because the state constitution says if locals are forced to do certain things, Sacramento needs to reimburse for it.

Other notable cuts include less spending on Medi-cal through new efforts at managed care alternatives for some 1.2 million patients; a 17% cut in available slots for subsidized child care; a $1 billion cut in prison spending, largely being attributed to the realignment of offenders to county jails.

The governor is also pushing changes -- i.e., fewer rules -- on state tax dollars spent on public schools. And he couches it all in the language of his desire to shift power to the local level.

"Let a thousand flowers bloom," said Brown in a paraphrase of Chairman Mao. "Let Kern County be Kernites, and let Modocians be Modocians, and let the San Francisco school district do what they do."

And yes, Brown's budget includes the promised new round of 'trigger cuts,' cuts that would automatically go into effect if his $7 billion tax initiative is rejected by voters on November 6.

Of the $5.4 billion in proposed trigger cuts, almost all are to education (with a few to the courts and CalFire thrown in for good measure). Most prominent is a $4.8 billion reduction in Proposition 98 guaranteed funding, which Brown's advisers say translates into a school year shortened by a whopping three weeks. The CSU and UC systems would also face new cuts should the tax package fail.

Brown is cognizant of accusations that the trigger list is equivalent to a threat to voters (the so-called "Washington Monument" strategy).

The governor's budget director, Ana Matasantos, says it's not that kind of ploy, because school funding represents the big dollars in the budget... and there's no other way to go if voters reject the taxes.

No governor's budget lands in the lap of the Legislature and is instantly praised and ratified, and neither will this one. Republicans, even in the post-Prop 25 world of budgets, will still be needed... because Brown proposes an extension of a fee on managed care plans to help fund health care for kids in low-income families. And that's a two-thirds vote. GOP legislators again called the budget full of one-time fixes, and urged more structural reforms.

Democrats, though, are where the real action is... and the leader of the state Senate seemed to throw some cold water on the prospect for fast action on the plan.

"When the governor proposes more cuts," said Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, "I'm very wary of that."

Steinberg said he doesn't support any cuts until spring tax revenues are counted. But that's a problem; the governor's proposal for cutting and revising the CalWorks program needs legislative enactment by March 1. If that doesn't happen, then he and his fellow Dems will have to start looking elsewhere.

And on the CalWorks cuts, expect some serious debate about the wisdom of another huge cut to a program that's already been cut a lot in recent years. Frank Mecca, executive director of the County Welfare Directors Association of California, says the governor's demand for stricter work requirements -- or else only 24 months of assistance for families -- comes at the same time where there already aren't enough jobs in general.

"24 months just isn't long enough," said Mecca.

There's a lot that has to happen from here. But for now, we've seen the proposal... it ain't pretty... and it's going to take a lot of negotiating, and even arm twisting, both at the state Capitol and -- as the tax campaign heats up -- around the state.

Yes, some of them are more likely than others. But foresight isn't 20/20, so take this with all of the appropriate caveats.

The Great Tax Debate: Yes, this one's an obvious choice. Governor Jerry Brown's nascent campaign to qualify and lead a $7 billion tax increase initiative to victory on November 6 is no doubt the biggest thing on the horizon. But it's the precise contours of how all of this plays out that seem, for now, most intriguing. Brown may believe, as do many, that the electorate's willingness to approve additional taxes is finally above the 50% mark. But the effort will be the biggest test so far of the iconic Democrat's political acumen. From clearing the field of other competing/conflicting tax initiatives, to raising big bucks, to carefully making the campaign about vital services and not less-than-beloved politicians... the governor will need to bring his A-game. And the campaign will no doubt be influenced by the daily headlines out of the Capitol on the budget -- which means, more than ever before, Brown may have to be extra careful to keep his fellow Democrats on message. Tax opponents begin any revenue campaign with a built-in advantage in California; any missteps by the governor's coalition could easily be magnified in the 24-hour cycle of mainstream and social media.

The Political Return of Indian Gaming Tribes? When news emerged a few days ago that Brown's tax initiative campaign had already raised more than $1 million, it was noted -- but not with any emphasis -- that a good chunk of the change came from some of the state's gaming tribes. And that's news all by itself, because tribes have been largely absent from big state political campaigns for the last seven years. That would be the same amount of time that a certain blockbuster chief executive who thew tribes into his fairly limited definition of "special interests." The only major political spending in that long exile was in 2008, when a group of big casino tribes defended amended gaming agreements in a series of ballot referenda.

Many tribes have sounded notes of approval about Brown in his first 12 months back as governor, and he's reciprocated with additional outreach to Indian country, most notably the creation of a new liaison to tribal governments.

Will we see more Indian gaming plays in political races in 2012? Tough to say. But the fact that tribes are part of Brown's coalition is important. And remember, too, that some of the state's most successful tribes have formal gaming agreements that were crafted in 1999 and expire in 2019 -- meaning Brown may be the governor who renegotiates those deals.

Republicans Forgotten, But Not Gone: There's a great scene in the 1999 cult classic movie Office Space where hated boss Bill Lumbergh pushes adds insult to injury to his beleaguered employee Milton Waddams, who he wishes would just quit.

"We're gonna need to go ahead and move you downstairs into storage B," says Lumbergh as he sneers at Milton's hidden away desk. "So if you could just go ahead and pack up your stuff and move it down there, that would be terrific, OK?"

Okay, that's admittedly a stretch to the plight of legislative Republicans in the statehouse (and only some good-natured ribbing, GOP friends). But 2012 may be the year that the Democratic majority and the Democratic governor decide they no longer need to treat Republicans as true governing partners. After all, the practical efect of both the governor's take-it-to-the-voters tax initiative and the Proposition 25 budget majority vote is that the GOP doesn't have an ace card in any of the expected big negotiations.

But wait, you say. What about economic incentive proposals that include tax changes (erasing a tax break requires a supermajority/bipartisan vote)? Suppose, as the governor was asked and left open in last week's news conference, there's an effort to postpone the November water bond measure? That, too, would likely require a supermajority vote.

The point is not so much that Republicans will, um, have their desks sent to the storage room... but more that GOP power as a minority party over the last decade has largely hinged on having some say-so in the budget process. Prop 25 took a huge bite out of that power; the absence of a Capitol debate on taxes in 2012 threatens to do so almost completely.

Life or Death on November 6?: My pick for initiative debate of the year is easily the proposed measure to abolish the death penalty in California. But only if it makes the ballot -- something that seems quite possible. The campaign seems to have a good head of steam in raising money to gather signatures. And frankly, should it qualify, the debate may be loud and passionate without slick mailers or TV ads that other initiatives need to get attention. Opponents of capital punishment were no doubt buoyed by the recent comments of California's chief justice, who expressed many of the practical and fiscal concerns that even long-time supporters of the law now cite in private conversations. To make matters even more interesting, the political debate comes as state officials continue to be vexed by court actions rejecting efforts to restart lethal injections at San Quentin. And while other governors may have gone out and personally campaigned against the abolition of capital punishment, Jerry Brown is an unlikely candidate for such a role. Yes, he's affirmed his stance on carrying out the law, but it was a younger Brown whose personal opposition to capital punishment played a pivotal role on the issue during his father's first term in office.

The Top Two Throwdowns: Political junkies will spend an awful lot of time watching the net effect of California's new primary elections system, and even campaign consultants admit that they're unsure of just how the so-called 'top two' primary will force them to adjust their strategies. And the lament goes something like this: do we spend big bucks in June and then risk having depleted coffers in November when it really counts? Or do we hold back our firepower, but risk a spoiler candidate (another party, an unknown contender, etc.) slipping into the top two slots on Election Night? Granted, the list of legislative and congressional districts likely to face the big change -- that is, a primary that ends with two candidates from the same party advancing to November -- is fairly small compared to the 153 races on the June ballot. But it's a fascinating storyline for us political junkies.

The Young & The Restless, 2014 Edition: You're forgiven if you think you didn't hear a convincing answer from Governor Jerry Brown last week when he was asked the question: are you running for reelection in 2014? Brown seems to genuinely be unsure, or unconcerned, with what happens that far in the future. But he's also smart enough to know that if he is intending to step aside, confirmation would almost instantly zap his political power in Sacramento.

All of which means the presumed heirs apparent -- Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Kamala Harris, LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and others -- will have to keep their powder dry. Newsom and Harris had pretty successful fundraising efforts in 2011, and certainly both may need that money for re-election to their current offices. But all three of the Dem heavyweights will be worth watching these next 12 months. Newsom, as do all lite guvs, has struggled to stay in the public eye for extended periods of time, and fell into a short-lived but testy squabble with Team Brown back in October over some comments to the Dem faithful. Harris has an expansive portfolio as AG and has made headlines on gang/drug issues and on her insistence in a do-over of a multi-state settlement on the "robo-signing" mortgage scandal. And Villaraigosa faces the next-to-last year of his mayoralty in Los Angeles, which may mean he'll need an agenda that translates into solid party cred before the race to replace him takes over the headlines in 2013.

By the way, the reason there's no mention here of Republicans angling for the big job in 2014... is because no one seems to be able to name any. But that's another story.

Will Facebook 'Friend' The State Budget? This is perhaps the most significant one to watch of all on the list, even though the hoped-for tidal wave wouldn't start to roll in for the state budget for some time to come.

Still, if Facebook at long last launches its initial public offering, there's a good chance it will mean a big payday the state's general fund, probably before Brown's first term ends.

"The most anticipated stock market debut of 2012 is expected to value Facebook at as much as $100 billion," Reuters reported recently, "which would top just about any of Silicon Valley's most celebrated coming-out parties, from Netscape to Google, Inc."

The Reuters piece goes on to quote a blind source who predicts "thousands of millionaires" in the Facebook employee rolls once the IPO takes place, an event several business news organizations are pointing out could come as soon as April. And yes, those new wealthy techies would be filing state taxes in California.

Yes, I know, the revenues wouldn't show up in 2012. But if the IPO happens, keep an eye on how big it ends up being. After all, the when the last titan of Silicon Valley -- Google -- went public in 2004, the impact to the state budget was profound... with reports of only a handful of tax returns easily counting for a nine-figure boost to the general fund.

In the Meantime: Here's to a happy and prosperous New Year for all of you, and many thanks for logging on and reading these missives. By the way, check out my crystal ball musings from a year ago (yes, with the same photo) to see how you think they fared over these past 365 days, as well as my New Year's Eve tweets (via Storify) of my own top 10 list of 2011's California political stories.

The governorship is not a dictatorship," said Gov. Jerry Brown in an interview Tuesday touching on several issues from his first year in office. (Photo: KQED/John Myers)

In a brief one-on-one interview after his Tuesday news conference, Brown took the long view on pensions, offered a succinct view of his governing philosophy, and -- yes -- invoked a Latin saying to make clear that he's nowhere near losing his appetite for life in the political arena.

Wednesday morning's edition of The California Report features extended excerpts of my conversation with Governor Brown, a chat interrupted at one point (and edited out of the radio feature) by the barking of his Corgi, Sutter, and an aide running in to find the First Pooch's leash.

The 73-year-old chief executive summed up the hard work of politics via the Latin phrase Ad Astra per Aspera, which he said means, "To the stars through the thorns." (In Kansas, apparently, they see Brown's translation of "thorns" as the word "difficulty," but the point is the same.)

And yet, he rejected any notion that the job is less, or worse, than it was cracked up to be when he took the oath of office back on January 3.

"It's not stressful," said Brown. "It's contentious, conflictual, and -- for some -- frustrating, but for me exhilarating."

The governor expounded on views offered earlier in the day of the campaign that lies ahead of him, a $7 billion tax increase to be considered by voters in next November. And Brown made it clear that his as-yet-unannounced coalition will be promoted representing the consensus view of the state's most influential men and women.

"If the majority of voters feel that the leaders of California, from all backgrounds, say this is something we need, then I think we'll win," said the governor in reference to the tax initiative. He also dismissed any notion that cajoling voters on a sales and income tax increase compares to the hard slog of trying to win GOP legislative support for an election on taxes in 2011.

"The voters will look at things in a more objective way" than did legislators, Brown said. And reiterating his assertion earlier in the day that leaders of several large businesses (not yet identified) will eventually sign on to the effort, Brown said that support already exists in private. As for the endorsement of the California Chamber of Commerce -- a major political force representing hundreds of big companies -- the governor likened the task to getting a proposal ratified by the Legislature. Enough said.

Governor Brown dismissed any talk of amending his tax proposal to better fit the interests of one of the other Democratic-leaning/union groups seeking a tax hike in 2012, saying there's just not enough time. And he repeated his assertion that multiple tax measures on next fall's ballot will doom them all.

That led us to a lengthy discussion of Brown's proposal to revamp pensions for future public employees. It's a proposal of which many in the union world are, to put it mildly, skeptical. And some political insiders say the harder Brown pushes pension reform in 2012, the harder he may find it to muster the political and fundraising muscle he needs from labor for his tax initiative.

"We have to accept reasonable reforms," said Brown who argued that the current structure, combined with longer life expectancy, is ultimately unsustainable. "When you sit back and think about it, it's only a matter of time."

But the governor is nowhere near the position of the most staunchly conservative pension reformers: he won't go after a do-over of future benefits for current public employees and he doesn't accept the worst-case scenarios about long-term unfunded liabilities.

"The vested right is more powerful than any other relationship in society," said Brown on the benefits promised current workers. "There's nothing so enduring as the pension obligation of the state of California or any of the local jurisdictions."

He reiterated his belief that some local governments will be "tempted" to challenge the case law surrounding promised benefits to current workers, but said he doesn't think the state is in the same predicament. "I believe at the state level, if we make reasonable reforms, that we can very much respect the existing precedents," said Brown.

And on the debate over how to calculate the size of the future shortfall -- which depends on what's a reasonable assumption on investment returns -- the governor dismissed what some call a "risk free" rate of return assumption on pension investment earnings, a rate of 4.5% a year.

"My risk-less rate of return is closer to zero," said Brown. "Return is connected to risk."

In the last few minutes of the chat, I asked the governor a little about the expectations he sets for the hard work of governing in an era of austerity, and the challenges of setting reasonable expectations from Californians who are eager for change... and now. And when I mentioned that his analogy likening governing to managing a chronic "condition" struck me as painting in less bright and bold colors as his predecessor, Jerry Brown was quick to rise to his own defense.

"Boldness is in the eye of the beholder," said Brown. And then, in what sounded awfully like an overall motto for governing, he said, "I will mix boldness with some pragmatism, so I get it done."

Click the icon below to hear the entire one-on-one interview with Governor Jerry Brown.

And yet on the first day of Christmas 2011 -- assume you celebrate, as the song does, 12 days -- that's what arrived for California. More deep cuts and, as we're told, more on the way.

This week's Capital Notes Podcast takes a closer look at Governor Jerry Brown's announcement of the automatic spending cuts. Kevin Yamamura of the Sacramento Bee and I also discuss the budget context in which these cuts will play out, as well as a look at the fiscal and tax fights looming for 2012.

KQED/John Myers

"Nemo dat non habet," said Governor Jerry Brown in a Capitol news conference. "It means, 'No man gives what he does not have.'"

And with that, Brown's administration pulled the trigger (or, perhaps, declared the pulling... you be the judge) on almost $981 million in state budget spending -- from higher education to child care subsidies to juvenile justice and beyond.

"We're pulling our budget into line," said the governor in discussing the cuts (PDF) -- cuts which were written into the June budget agreement to be entirely dependent on (and thus "automatic") projections of state revenues for the 12-month fiscal year that ends on June 30, 2012.

That revenue estimate, according to Brown's economists, is $2.2 billion below what was written into the state budget. That may sound gloomy, but it's substantially better than last month's projection by the Legislative Analyst's Office of a $3.7 billion gap between the budget and reality.

The budget language mandating automatic cuts in such a scenario says whichever forecast -- the governor's or the LAO's -- is most optimistic wins... and so the automatic cut list is smaller than many expected.

Brown's budget director, Ana Matasantos, told reporters that the difference in forecasts is largely explained by her team having new data since November -- data showing, she says, better sales and income tax receipts -- and a different viewpoint on federal tax law changes being contemplated in Washington, i.e. a final outcome more advantageous to the state's revenues.

One thing is clear: the trigger cuts won't be stayed by any emergency gathering of the Legislature. Not only has the governor resisted such suggestions, but legislative leaders have also nixed the idea on the grounds that there's no consensus on any sort of Plan B.

"The trigger is the trigger," said Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg at a Capitol event before the governor's announcement. "It's already been legislated."

It's important to remember that the "trigger cuts" provision in last summmer's budget emerged as a demand of Governor Brown in the handful of days between his veto of the first budget sent to his desk and his signature on a revised spending plan on June 28. Even so, Brown took a fair amount of flack for agreeing to revise upward revenues by $4 billion, a concession seen by some as yet another chapter in the book of state budget gimmicks.

I asked the governor in his Capitol event whether, in retrospect, he wishes he hadn't agreed to that rosier revenue projection and had pushed for a more conservative estimate. He said, in fact, he feels just the opposite.

"At least we got half the revenue," he said. "By and large, it was much wiser to assume the $4 billion than to make $4 billion in cuts. That would have been immediate devastation to many."

And yet, he admitted that revenue forecasting is -- at best -- inexact. "To some extent, it's prophecy," said Brown.

That prophecy also must struggle with what has become a staple of California budgets: lawsuits. There's already a temporary restraining order that could block the 'triggered' $100 million cut to In-Home Supportive Services. Add to that a federal challenge to existing health care cuts and, as we're now hearing, a likely lawsuit to block the biggest 'triggered' cut to K-12 schools -- a $248 million cut in school transportation funds.

Republicans, when they weren't jabbing Democrats Tuesday for rejecting GOP budget ideas back during the legislative session, tried to capitalize on the next big question: the political battle ahead over Governor Brown's $7 billion sales/income tax hike initiative?

"Lost in the slick sales pitch for higher so-called temporary taxes is the fact that our tax revenues are up over last year," said Sen. Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar) in a written statement. "Raising the tax rates at a time our state is struggling to emerge from a recession and high unemployment is not the answer, and will strangle our recovery."

The governor mused during his Q&A with the press about the upcoming 2012 electoral challenge, taking great pains to admit that it won't be easy. He also, when prompted (by me), ventured into the greater debate into which his tax initiative will swirl: the fight over economic equality issues, sparked by the Occupy movement, and how that jibes -- or clashes -- with the default position of many Californians to oppose taxes.

"I think the inequality fuels the demand for more spending," he said. "And that's why the only tax that's overwhelmingly popular is the [proposed] tax on wealthier people."

Brown admitted his first challenge is to, as many have said, try and clear the field of other potential tax increasing initiatives -- a process he said he has begun, but one on which he admitted he still has work to do. And only then, it seems, can he present some sort of political and policy coalition for his own proposal... all while also trying to hold together Democratic factions who will no doubt hate the 2012-13 budget proposal he unveils in less than a month.