Redistricting

This piece in the Contra Costa Times asks whether there's "donor fatigue" as Gov. Schwarzenegger raises money for his redistricting initiative and perhaps, some sort of budget reform ballot measure (or measures) in November. It's a fair question. The problem may not be fatigue but donors' clear-eyed assessment of the political chances of redistricting and budget reform. Redistricting has a perfect record at the ballot over the last 15 years -- it's lost every time -- and budget reform proposals of all stripes (notably Prop. 56 in 2004--backed by Democrats and unions -- and Prop. 76 -- backed by Schwarzenegger and Republicans --  in 2005) have gone down to defeat. What is the point of spending good money on reform proposals that will go down to defeat, no matter their merits?

Capitol Weekly has a good piece on the Schwarzenegger redistricting initiative as a test of a new non-profit reform group, California Forward, led by former Congressman and Clinton Chief of Staff Leon Panetta. Panetta is one of the best strategic thinkers in the state, but fighting dysfunction in the Clinton White House is nothing compared to fighting dysfunction in California state government.

BASS EXPANDS ON TAX REVIEW: The incoming California Assembly Speaker Karen Bass explains her plans for a tax reform commission in an interview with the Associated Press. Aaron McLear, a spokesman for the governor, is quoted as saying that the governor is interested in tax reform but it's "not a substitute for reforming our broken budget system." Yes, and no. Clearly, the state budget process needs procedural changes, and there are strong arguments for establishing a real reserve and an ability to respond more effectively to changes in revenue. But the main failed attempts at spending-side budget reform suggests that budget reform may not be possible without tax reform.

Last month, I wrote in the Los Angeles Times about how Gov. Schwarzenegger's pursuit of education cuts as part of his budget proposal was undermining his efforts to achieve redistricting and budget reforms. A new poll from the Public Policy Institute of California offers more evidence. His stance on education is so unpopular -- only a quarter of Californians approve of his handling of education -- that it's dragging down his overall popularity (to 41 percent in the poll). Schwarzenegger is leading the way in offering reforms, but if he doesn't drop the education cuts -- and he has the opportunity to do just that with his revised budget proposal later this month, his low popularity will poison those reform ideas and end his last chance to make major changes in how the state governs itself.

Rick Claussen, consultant to the redistricting initiative in California, reports that the final count of sigs, after last night's turn-in, is just under 1.2 million. With those numbers -- nearly twice as many as the number of required valid signatures -- the initiative should have no trouble qualifying for the November ballot.

With a per signature price increase to $2.25 and other measures already qualifying, the redistricting initiative, backed by Gov. Schwarzenegger, had a very good week on the streets of California. So good that signature gatherers were told over the weekend to do a "final turn in" of their signatures by tonight. This also suggests there was a ton of hoarding going on two weeks ago--that is, gatherers were holding back signatures in hopes that the price would go up. Rick Claussen, consultant to the effort, says this morning that the sponsors expect to have more than 1.1 million signatures by the end of this week--more than a week earlier than the previous plan. In fact, with redistricting off the street, there is little paying work left in California at the moment. Many of the top gatherers and coordinators are leaving to work on initiatives in other states.

Governor Schwarzenegger has used ballot measures more often than any political figure in American history. He has spent more $25 million on his political career, most of that on ballot initiatives (and to the TV ads and signature gathering such campaigns require). He's kicked in more than $1 million into a new redistricting initiative which has little chance of passing. (CORRECTION: This $1.25 million donation comes not from personal funds--but from one of his political committees).This begs a question: is the blockbuster democracy industry taking advantage of the wealthy governor?

Just got my hands on a new book with an interesting new argument that has relevance for California's ongoing battle over redistricting reform.

In The Big Sort, Bill Bishop, a reporter in Texas, argues that Americans have sorted themselves into homogeneous communities, enclaves full of people with similar backgrounds, education and politics. If he's right, and he has a mountain of demographic evidence, redistricting reforms of the type offered in Gov. Schwarzenegger's current ballot initiative are likely to do very little to give us the kind of bipartisan politics and competitive elections California reformers seek.

It may be that, once again, it's time for California and reformers across the country to think bigger if they want political change. And it may simply be impossible to change politics by changing legislative districts. The real trick is to increase the quantity and quality of voter engagement, and to change the culture and make-up of communities. For its civic health, America needs more than redistricting, though that's the reform we're being fed over and over in the largest state. Tackling polarization is a big job, and hard to do by ballot initiative -- or to contemplate in a short blog post.

Rick Claussen, the consultant and initiative expert who has been brought in to help qualify the current redistricting initiative in California, got in touch this week. Claussen, who works from the Sacramento suburbs, is one of the grown-ups in the direct democracy business and has one of its strongest records, particularly in winning "yes" campaigns, which are much more difficult than "no" campaigns. He worked on previous Schwarzenegger ballot campaigns in 2004 and 2005, and he expressed confidence by email that the redistricting measure will qualify in time for the November ballot.

Claussen says the initiative is on track to hit its target of 1.1 million signatures the first week of May; signatures will be submitted the week of May 12. That number of signatures is nearly twice the 694,354 legally required to make the ballot. But in the initiative business, it is standard operating procedure to submit hundreds of thousands more signatures than legally required -- in large part to speed up the qualification process. When more signatures than required are submitted, county elections officials -- who do the counting in California -- can count using "random sampling" techniques, rather than by going through every signature. If the random sample shows that the number of valid signatures is greater than 110 percent of the legally required number (and a validity rate of 70 percent is considered good in this business), then the initiative automatically qualifies for the ballot. This makes things much faster.

If Californians see the petition circulators outside their grocery stores smiling this week, you'll know the reason: Gov. Schwarzenegger. The Sacramento Bee's Capitol Alert is first to report that the governor has kicked in another $700,000 to the redistricting initiative. As reported here first Sunday, the per-signature price paid to gatherers goes up, from $2 to $2.25 this week, making it the best-paying of the three major measures still on the street.

This continues Schwarzenegger's pattern of putting his money where his mouth is. For all of the criticism he's received for his more than $100 million in fundraising since launching his political career in 2003, Schwarzenegger has been the number one donor to his own career -- more than $25 million -- and most of that money has been spent not on his own election but on ballot measures to advance his agenda. Governing has never been so expensive in California.