Talk:Pat Brown

message: Hi, I think the carear of family members of the subject belong on their indivual articles, and don't need to be included everywhere.  We don't need Kathleen's and Jerry's political carears on Pat's article, that's why they have or could have their own pages.  Mentioning that Pat had a son who was Governor and a daughter who was Treasuerer(sp?) is ok, but we don't need who they beat, and when the ran for other offices, ect.  Anyone object? Gentgeen 07:41, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Family member inclusion

message: Section 1 states he was the Democratic nominee for Governor of California in 1958, while section 4 states that, due to California's history of embracing the practice of cross-filing (which was ended in 1959), he had been the Republican nominee for Governor of California in 1958 (and subsequently the Democratic nominee for Governor in '62).  I suspect section 4 is correct; that due to the dynamics of that particular year, he decided he'd have an easier time winning the Republican nomination than the Democratic one.  As section 4 correctly states, party identification mattered very little in California during the era of cross-filing (men such as Governor Earl Warren, and Senator Hiram W. Johnson, were nominated by both the Democrats and the Republicans during the same years, for example).  Needless to say, some clarification (and correction) on this matter is very much in order. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 04:10, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  1958 Nomination 

message: That's fine having a  meaty, substantial discussion on the death penalty, even mentioning some of the controversy.  This makes for a better article.
However . . . did the man do any else as governor ? ! ?  Currently, more than half the Governor of California section is about the death penalty.
Yes, we do mention the water projects.  But do we mention economic growth in California, the ramp of the space program (through Mercury and Gemini and early stages of Apollo).  Or, environmental protection?  For example, when did California institute tougher vehicle exhaust standards than the rest of the nation?  The economy as regards employment numbers and quality of life (for example, percentage of Californians within middle class) on one hand, and the economy as regards tax revunue and the state budget on the other hand.  Sometimes these two go together and sometimes they don't.
I do think we could make this section far richer and more informative.  FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 21:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The man do anything besides wrestle with death penalty cases ? ? ?  

message: California Rising: The Life and Times of Pat Brown, Ethan Rarick, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2005, pages 152-53.
[summary]
In the spring of 1960, Governor Brown signed the Donahoe Higher Education Act, more informally referred to as the “Master Plan.”  Including junior colleges, enrollment in higher education in California approximately doubled while Brown was in office, a rate of growth that kept college attendance in California well above the national average.  During Brown’s two terms, spending for the UC system more than doubled, and for the state colleges more than tripled [adjusted for inflation, or for baby boomers projected to start college?]  During his tenure, four new state colleges were opened, a total unmatched by the next four governors combined.  Also three new university campuses were built for the UC system.  And during the next 30 years, the state added no new university campuses. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 20:41, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion of higher education under Governor Brown

message: "Nixon resorted to accusing Brown of 'softness' against communism", particularly the term "resorted to", is biased or non-neutral phrasing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:14C:8201:18A0:F9F9:F4E7:5EE:886F (talk) 22:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-neutral language