Never mind weighty debates over taxation and government's obligation to help infirm old people, the mentally disabled and children of poor mothers.
Let's talk Ferris wheels, corn dogs, fried Twinkies and blue ribbons for the finest sheep in the county.
In California, Republican legislators led by Sen. Doug LaMalfa of Richvale decried the Democratic proposal to eliminate $32 million in state taxpayer subsidies for county fairs.
LaMalfa and the other 14 Senate Republicans are also protesting a plan to shift $10 million for off-road vehicle trails to the general fund where it would be used for schools, universities and prisons.
On prisons, the debate turned positively bitter.
Republicans warn that we all need guns for self-defense, home alarms and watchdogs now that Democrats have voted to incarcerate felons with short sentences in county jails rather than state prisons, a step intended to cut $563 million from the $10 billion annual cost of corrections.
After two days of budget follies last week, it became obvious that Gov. Jerry Brown's budget plan, while not yet dead, is in deep trouble.
In party-line votes, Democrats approved a $123 billion budget that cut subsidies for fairs and off-roaders. It also borrowed and slashed $14 billion from welfare, universities, health care for poor people and other programs.
Democrats could approve the budget without Republican votes. But they need at least two Republican votes in the Senate and two in the Assembly to obtain the two-thirds majority for the toughest piece – Brown's proposal to ask voters to extend $11 billion in annual taxes for another five years.
They don't seem close.
Treasurer Bill Lockyer, who has been trying to line up support for Brown's plan, is talking publicly about the possibility of an "all-cuts budget" – one without taxes. Brown has said he would have no choice but to cut much more deeply into state programs if the taxes fail.
"An all-cuts budget is something no one would wish for who is rational," Lockyer said.
Rationality is in short supply, as is comity.
Even if Brown manages to persuade Republicans to vote to place the tax package before voters, Democratic strategists are skeptical that voters would approve it.
Pollster Ben Tulchin tested voter attitudes recently toward the taxes and found support was tepid at best, with 31 percent of the voters definitely supporting it and 30 percent sure to oppose it.
"We all know it is a tough hill to climb – first, to get it on the ballot, and, two, to pass it," Tulchin said. "You have to recognize that this may not happen."
Democratic interest groups, primarily organized labor, already are testing support for future ballot measures that would raise taxes on, for example, the wealthy and businesses.
"A lot of groups are looking at November 2012 to put one or more progressive revenue measures on the ballot," Tulchin said.
Perhaps legislators will reach across the aisle in the next few days and strike an accord. But during last week's budget debates, that kumbaya moment seemed far away.
Take, for example, legislation proposed by Brown to trim $1.1 billion in welfare spending. It would be a cut in government spending Republicans normally would embrace, but not in the topsy-turvy world of the California Legislature.
Among its many provisions, the legislation would reduce by a year the time a person can remain on welfare, saving the state $156 million, and cut welfare checks by 8 percent, down to $638 a month from the current $694 a month, saving $304 million a year.
All 52 Assembly Democrats voted for the welfare cuts, something most found especially painful. But only five of 27 Assembly Republicans voted for it.
What would Republicans cut? They haven't come up with a list, saying that's the job for Brown and Democrats who control the Legislature to decide. But it's more than that – they just fundamentally distrust the Democrats.
Assemblywoman Linda Halderman, a first-term Republican from Fresno, cast "no" votes throughout the two-day budget marathon, including on the welfare cuts.
I asked what I thought was a simple question. What was her thinking? She answered: "When I see a budget bill that is balanced and doesn't hurt people in my district, I would be happy to support it." Then she turned on her heels and walked away. I guess it was a hard question.
It gets more curious. Brown has called for the elimination of a 60-year-old state law authorizing local governments to operate redevelopment agencies, which use the power of eminent domain to declare land blighted and seize private property for development.
It's another issue Republicans normally would embrace. They profess to support free markets and complain that government misuses redevelopment to rob people of property rights.
In the end, only one Assembly Republican, Chris Norby, an Orange County conservative, joined the 52 Democrats who voted to end redevelopment. Norby had a hard time explaining his fellow Republicans.
"There is a fear in the caucus of giving the governor anything," Norby said during a break in the voting.
Republicans assume that if they seem to be collaborating with Democrats, or dare to vote to place Brown's tax measure on the ballot, party leaders will vilify them, and they almost certainly would lose primary elections.
Brown has tried to cultivate Republicans by attending their receptions and visiting their private caucus meetings. The face time hasn't helped.
As experienced as he is, Brown has not been able to close the deal on his budget. He seems to have underestimated Republicans' unwillingness to budge, and overestimated his powers of persuasion.
In the house of mirrors otherwise know as the Capitol, Brown is seeing firsthand that today's Republican legislators are very different from those he knew in his first stint as governor three decades ago.

