Posted on 01/12/2005 8:51:25 AM PST by NormsRevenge
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said yesterday he was open to loosening the voter-approved term limits on state lawmakers, saying the mandatory short tenure is depriving the Legislature of experience and knowledge.
"We never really create someone that is an expert in anything in Sacramento," he said, "because before you become an expert you are out."
Some political analysts have suggested that lawmakers might look more favorably on Schwarzenegger's proposal to strip the Legislature's authority to redraw congressional and legislative district boundaries if he would seek a change in the 1990 initiative that limits lawmakers to six years in the Assembly and eight in the state Senate.
The governor indicated he might be amenable to that.
"The special interests are becoming more powerful and smarter and having more influence than the legislators because they're such experts," the governor said. "They're around forever. That's a big disadvantage now, and so now people are talking about maybe we should extend the term limits."
Schwarzenegger's comments came during a question-and-answer session with The San Diego Union-Tribune editorial board, which also was attended by editors and reporters from the newsroom. The board regularly invites newsmakers to discuss current events.
It was the Republican governor's first stop as he embarked on a statewide tour of interviews to sell his sweeping "reform agenda," which he intends to put before California voters in a special election this year.
As he begins his second full year in office, Schwarzenegger said his proposals to overhaul the state's finances and politics are his focus, so much so that he said he hasn't given any thought about whether to run for a second term in 2006.
"I don't want to think about next year," he said. "I want to think about now. We want to fix things now, because if we fix this, every door is open."
Schwarzenegger said he approaches his future in politics much as he did his career in Hollywood.
"When I was in the movie business, I never concentrated on my next movie," he said. "I always just thought about the movie I'm making, because if the movie you're making goes through the roof and it's a huge hit at the box office, you don't have to worry about your next movie."
In his State of the State address last week, Schwarzenegger unveiled his four-part "reform agenda":
Requiring automatic across-the-board budget cuts when spending outpaces revenues.
Scrapping the state's system of guaranteed pensions in favor of a 401(k)-style plan.
Basing teacher pay on performance evaluations instead of tenure.
Taking redistricting authority away from the Legislature and giving it to a panel of retired judges.
Schwarzenegger said he believes legislative leaders of both parties are willing to negotiate, but made it clear he will put his agenda before the voters if they do not.
"The first thing is that I want to work with them and see how far that we can take them," he said. "It could easily be that there's a certain point that the whole negotiations fall apart and then, of course, the next step is to get the signatures and go to the ballot."
Labor unions representing state employees are digging in for a fight over the governor's proposals on pensions and teacher pay.
"I did not propose this reform by thinking that everyone, labor and everyone, is going to come to the office and kiss me," he said. "I'm realistic. I know that when you start stepping on their toes and you start doing these reforms, people will be upset."
Schwarzenegger's $111.7 billion budget unveiled Monday has drawn complaints from education officials that he reneged on last year's agreement that schools would get the full increase guaranteed by the Proposition 98 financing formula.
And advocates of social-service programs and lawmakers in the Legislature's Democratic majority object that his cuts fall disproportionately on the poor.
Schwarzenegger was unapologetic. "We only have so much money. And that's the money we can spend. It's that simple," he said.
Democratic legislators have suggested tax increases to offset some of the proposed budget cuts – although no formal proposals have been made – but Schwarzenegger would not budge from his insistence that tax increases are off the table.
He said a tax increase to wipe out the state's more than $8 billion deficit would not work because formulas built into the budget would push spending higher.
"You raise the $8 billion and that now means that you owe to the education community another 43 percent," he said. "So you now don't have an $8 billion debt, you now go almost to $11 billion, $11.5 (billion)."
Schwarzenegger did express a willingness to make his redistricting proposal more palatable to legislators by offering changes in term limits.
"I always, again, assumed that that would be something that we would negotiate because I am sure that the last thing that they want would be for me to go to the ballot with the initiative process," he said. "They maybe want to talk about term limits at the same time."
The governor said he has gotten an "unbelievable amount" of pressure from both parties to leave the redistricting process alone for now, but said he regards it as a matter of competition.
Because both parties cut a deal on the districts after the 2000 census, he noted, none of the 153 congressional and legislative seats at stake in the November election changed parties.
"What kind of democracy is that?" he asked. "Why not have a system where we open it up and where it's so competitive, like in the private sector, where you are always on and where you say, 'I've got to make the right decision because otherwise I lose my job'?"
Schwarzenegger said he would like to have an election early this summer. But given the Legislature's deliberative nature, the timeline of the initiative process and deadlines for calling a special election, a vote in the fall is more likely.
He said he expects interests sympathetic to Democrats to try to load up the ballot with their own initiatives, but made it clear he will use his formidable megaphone and salesmanship skills to prevent his agenda from being upstaged.
"I will put the attention on that and I will keep hammering away," he said. "I am like an Alabama tick. I stick there and you can't get rid of me."
"Experts" in government we don't need.
It seems to me that a better system would be something like 30 "superdistricts" with 5 legislators each. The top 5 vote getters would represent each district. THAT would be competitive!!!
I don't know why he thinks this. All they do when they're term-limited is run for a different position. Assembly members find a Senate seat to run for, and vice versa.
It's still the same people.
The only way that this would gain traction with me is if the legislature is reduced to part-time instead of full time.
And...extended terms for gub'ners as well, Arnie?
Gee. That'd be just great. Then I'd have to put up with Tom Torlakson and Loni Hancock even longer than I do now. I don't know if it really matters - when their terms are up, they'll just be replaced with equally leftist legislators.
Ahnuld is an idiot. A certified idiot.
RINO alert.
Boy, I do not understand Arnold. One day I think he is great and the next he comes up with something like this. I guess no politician can satisfy everybody all the time. Keep term limits the way they are.
Never fall in love with a politician.
They'll break your heart in the end.
"The special interests are becoming more powerful and smarter and having more influence than the legislators because they're such experts," the governor said. "They're around forever. That's a big disadvantage now, and so now people are talking about maybe we should extend the term limits."
The real problem is finding a way of getting rid of entrenched incumbents who get elected for life. The best way to do that is through fair redistricting, since that gives challengers a real chance. Redistricting also deals with Congressional representatives, who can't be touched by state-mandated term limits.
Even without gerrymandering, incumbents will retain a significant (but not necessarily insurmountable) advantage. That's where term limits can provide some added benefit. It prevents even the most powerful state legislator from becoming ensconced for life. But the present limits are too short, because they are trying to perform the extra function of compensating for the current gerrymandering.
If Arnold can get a fair redistricting plan approved by the voters, that will be a much greater political reform than term limits. And if a modest increase in the existing term limits will mute the opposition to redistricting and help it pass, that's a great trade-off. Indeed, I would consider it a win-win.
The longer a politician is in office the more expert he becomes, he becomes expert in stealing money from the people, he becomes expert in how to pass really crappy legislation by appending it to another worthwhile bill. He(or she) becomes expert on all sorts of illegal and highly questionable acts. Oh, yes, term limits certainly limit the learning process alright, which is why CA voters voted for term limits. Arnold had better get with the program. I have had it with this guy.
Arnold is telling the Legislature there's a trade-off - if you want longer terms, give up your redistricting power. And knowing politicians, they just might grab it.
I will put the attention on that and I will keep hammering away," he said. "I am like an Alabama tick. I stick there and you can't get rid of me."
For y'all folks in Alabama, one tick is all you need to weaken the strongest Democrat!
No, Californians voted for term limits to dig people like Willie Brown out of his gerrymandered district, because otherwise such entrenched legislators would be sitting up there in Sacramento for the rest of their lives. It was a crude tool for getting rid of politicians who couldn't be gotten rid of any other way.
Unfortunately it also limits the few good politicians (like Tom McClintock) who we'd like to keep in office. And the lengths of the term limits were set to relatively small values (6 years for Assembly and 8 years for State Senate) so that they could take effect as soon as possible (since they couldn't be applied retroactively).
Now that the term limits have been in effect for a few years, it wouldn't hurt if the limits were extended an extra 2 or 4 years. If that will encourage some politicians to sign on to a redistricting measure (or at least to not vigorously oppose it), then it's certainly worth doing.
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.