Posted on 12/12/2004 8:47:23 PM PST by SierraWasp
Governor considers calling special election
By Ann E. Marimow
TIMES SACRAMENTO BUREAU
SACRAMENTO - After his string of ballot measure successes, Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger might call a special election next year to force radical change on the Democratic-controlled state Legislature.
The governor and his advisers are considering a long list of proposals to change the shape of legislative and congressional districts, require rapid disclosure of campaign donations, impose new limits on state spending and subject the Legislature to more public scrutiny.
If successful, Schwarzenegger could intimidate his competition for 2006, should he decide to run for re-election. If he fails, it would be a blow to the governor's momentum at a critical time.
A California governor last called a special election in 1993. This one would cost roughly $60 million and send voters statewide to the polls for the sixth time in less than four years.
"I just don't see anything that requires that kind of urgent attention," said UC Berkeley political scientist Bruce Cain. "It looks suspiciously like it's there to keep Arnold amused and his advisers paid."
There's a danger, he said, that voters will "suspect the motives, and that will imperil the chances of the initiatives passing."
In the lead-up to next month's State of the State address, in which the governor will outline his agenda for 2005, Schwarzenegger's political and policy advisers say discussions about a special election and what it might include are still in the formative stages.
Only governors can call special elections, and they must be scheduled five months ahead of the desired date. For one to be held next fall, for instance, Schwarzenegger would have to decide sometime in the spring. Or he could decide to wait until the next scheduled statewide election, in June 2006.
"There are a lot of options available," said communications director Rob Stutzman. "We're weighing those and considering the course the governor will take."
The popular governor has used the threat of a ballot initiative before to put pressure on a Legislature that has a poor reputation with voters.
Schwarzenegger would probably look to outside groups to take the lead as he did in the spring with a business-backed measure meant to overhaul the state's costly workers compensation system. Ultimately, legislators cut a deal with the governor, and the plans for a more stringent initiative were dropped.
This time, there are several measures that could appeal to Schwarzenegger, who has said decisions about the makeup of political districts should not be left to elected officials. Ted Costa, the anti-tax crusader who brought California the recall, is gathering signatures for a redistricting initiative that would turn over the process to retired judges. Two legislators have introduced similar bills.
The aim is to rejigger district boundaries that were designed by legislative leaders in 2001 to protect incumbents and maintain the balance between Democrats and Republicans. The districts are so secure that not a single legislative or congressional seat switched parties in the November election.
"It didn't make any difference what you did," said Schwarzenegger, who campaigned for Republican legislators. "So we have to kind of let retired judges go and do the redistricting, people that have nothing at stake."
The governor probably would be stymied if he tried to work through the Legislature. Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, has said the Legislature should remain involved in designing districts because lawmakers would be more accountable to voters than retired judges.
Gale Kaufman, a political consultant to Nunez, said any effort by Schwarzenegger to change the rules would be seen as a partisan response to last month's election results.
"It's a crass political move to add more Republicans into the Legislature," she said. "It has nothing to do with moving energy policy, transportation policy, the budget or any of the serious things that he was elected supposedly to do."
Speculation about what the governor might do is speeding up the work of political consultants, who want to make sure they collect enough signatures for their initiatives before Schwarzenegger acts. If he does call a special election, any other qualified initiatives would become part of the ballot.
Two taxpayer rights groups and Sen. John Campbell, R-Irvine, have crafted a measure aimed at staving off future budget deficits. During the recall, Schwarzenegger embraced a similar hard-and-fast spending cap. But he settled for something weaker, a balanced budget requirement, after negotiating with the Legislature.
Dave Gilliard, the campaign's consultant, is awaiting initial approval from the attorney general to begin gathering signatures.
"We never thought about a special when we put this together," he said. "But now that there's a chance, we want to be ready to go."
Schwarzenegger's team is also considering proposals to give Californians more access to legislative records and meetings because the just-passed Proposition 59, which created a constitutional right to access, did not specifically apply to the Legislature. And the governor is said to be interested in instant disclosure of campaign contributions.
One issue unlikely to make it to the ballot, according to an adviser, is the set of recommendations from the governor's massive top-to-bottom review of state government known as the California Performance Review. Schwarzenegger could reshuffle and streamline the state bureaucracy through legislation and unilateral executive orders on a wide-range of areas, while an initiative can only cover a single subject.
the issues
Among the reform proposals Schwarzenegger and his political team are contemplating to set before voters next year:
Redistricting: Schwarzenegger wants to take elected officials out of the process of designing legislative and congressional districts. The current boundaries were drawn in 2001 to freeze the balance between Democrats and Republicans. Ted Costa, the man behind the 2003 recall drive, is collecting signatures for an initiative that would turn the job over to a panel of retired judges.
Budget reform: During the recall, Schwarzenegger embraced a strict limit on state spending to try to avoid budget deficits that have plagued the state. Taxpayer advocates and Sen. John Campbell, R-Irvine, are preparing a measure that would limit increases in spending to changes in population growth, plus inflation.
Open records: The governor wants to apply new requirements for public access to legislative meetings and records, similar to those voters approved last month under Proposition 59 for local government and the executive branch.
Campaign finance: Schwarzenegger is said to favor instant, online disclosure of campaign contributions.
I support a special election. The special interests don't want to change things in Sacramento - and our State Legislature's approval ratings here are lower than Al Qaeda's.
Time to take out the broom to clean house again in 2005.
Let's roll then. Who needs political scientists anyway? Maybe if Arnold passes enough initiatives, parasites in the University system might find real meaningful employment.
Gee, Arnold is doing so well ( with a few exceptions), that he is even surprising me, and you know I had full confidence in him from day 1. :)
CA: State Power Agency Shuts Down ~ Dies with a whimper ~ accomplishes little ~ thanks Arnold )
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1299987/posts
'Christmas' Returns to the Capitol (CA) (Schwarzenegger)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1299615/posts
I like it. And he can do it.
I do think this is possibly a good idea. It does have some dangers to it as well. But CA is so screwed up now, that just about anything might be an improvement. Especially since we have such a phlegmatic legislature!!!
Good, then do half of it by suing in Federal Court to reverse Reynolds v. Sims.
Return the State Senate to its original purpose.
I stongly supported Prop 13, but since then so many, especially people like Harvey Rosenfeld (can't remember what he called his group) and Gerald Mearl of the Urban Planning and Conservation League have made an abject mockery of the initiative process!!!
We win some and we lose some. Let's not forget the fact the state-wide electorate is on the whole, a different creature from the one that votes to return Democrats to power in Sacramento around election time.
That's right yer honor, but it cuts both ways!!!
Cows may not vote, but their owners sure have been screwed out of their taxation with adequate representation ever since your stupid decision!!!
I'm very uncomfortable with the governor having even indirect power to control the composition of the legilsature via the power to nominate a board controlling reapportionment.
The less accountable we make the legislature, the less the local elections mean, the less representation we actually have. It's one of the perverse effects of the initiative process.
When ends are used to justify means, we'd best have more respect for the law of unintended consequences.
That's ok. You know Reynolds v. Sims is my favorite subject, you rascal!!!
Arnold has the annoying habit of grabbing off other people's initiatives for his own and tweaking/torquing them till you can't recognize them!
NormsRevenge has been pushing Howard Kaloogian's redistricting initiative and Arnold should help Howard, not snatch it away, like he did the recall and another on on workers comp, I believe... It's irritating as all get out!!!
I don't see a reversal as likely, considering the abuses that brought it about. That earth has been scorched. But a non-political body could make a difference here.
Oh Yes.
The original alignment of State Senate and Assembly, reflected the grand compromise between populous and sparsely populated and small states that gave us the US Constitution. For Warren to chuck it was to concentrate urban power and completely disenfranchise rural areas with the potential to grow. His decision was a bald faced repudiation of the Federal Convention.
That's the part I'm missing here. What was the basis for apportionment in CA before the case you cite?
And why GVgirl and I share one state senator with 13 other counties, while some one in LA county has access to 13 state senate votes!!!
That's quite alright. My response was that its better to let the people rather than a roomful of politicians, decide whether it constitutes accountable and responsive government. Its the way the initiative process is supposed to work - power to the people.
My view would be to to abolish the State Senate and create an elected supercouncil of local governments organized on a regional basis. No use having two houses elected by population. My proposal differs from the current set up in that it gives local governments a voice in the policy-making process in Sacramento. And it has the advantage of representing people, not cows.
That is nearly exactly what the Senate was. In fact, it would be best if State Senators were appointed by county supervisors much the way US Senators were to be appointed by State legislatures.
We disagree, as we have on this before. A legislative house so constituted would lose traceable accountability to an elected government. A legilsative body of 58 isn't so large as to be unwieldly.
That's crap. It's a matter of representing local governments as individuals with rights of their own, much as we used to have states' rights.
I suppose you would wish for a US Senate of maybe nine individuals representing areas with similar climate and geography. Hey, we could call them bioregions!
You DO know that this is exactly what the communists proposing world government want? Think again.
"I just don't see anything that requires that kind of urgent attention," said UC Berkeley political scientist Bruce Cain. "It looks suspiciously like it's there to keep Arnold amused and his advisers paid."
If this guy can't see anything that needs fixing, that means we desperately need major changes.
Good point. What I'm trying to get answered, if anyone on this thread knows: What was the basis for apportionment in CA before the Sims case? As you point out, two houses elected on the same basis don't make any sense.
That's an excellent point. There is so much that needs fixing in this State. But in good 'ol clueless Academia, everything is just peachy as long as the checks just keep coming in.
I shudder everytime I read that. Thanks for the chilling reminders.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.