Redistricting

THE GROWING BALLOT: Friend of the blog Robert Greene has this excellent update on the rapidly expanding California ballot. The voters have done their part through signature gathering; now the legislature adds its own measure to the ballot.

HIGH SPEED RAIL: The much delayed bond measure establishing a high-speed rail system in California will finally appear on this November's ballot. But the legislature can't reach a compromise on oversight for the funding.

This piece from Capitol Weekly is a must-read. It profiles Courtni Pugh, the sharpest labor strategist I met during my admittedly brief time covering labor for the LA Times. It also reports that SEIU California may be close to backing the redistricting reform initiative on the November ballot. Such an endorsement could be a game-changer for that initiative, whose political prospects have not been good. And if SEIU is looking at such an endorsement, it's a good bet that the union has a lot of research and numbers that suggest that changing the reapportionment rules might make it easier to elect more labor-friendly politicians to office.

Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Weintraub writes today that politicians will lie to beat the redistricting reform initiative on the November ballot. But if Ted Costa's views are heard, they may not need to do much.

Ted Costa was the original proponent of both the recall of Gov. Gray Davis and of Prop 77, the failed redistricting initiative in 2005. In an email, he blasts the new initiative, Prop 11, as a "power grab," matching the rhetoric -- if not meaning -- of the measure's opponents.

Democrats and legislators have constituted most of the opposition to this point. But Costa is a Republican, and his argument, if it gets heard over the din of the presidential election and the gay marriage ban, could peel Republicans off the measure. Costa also betrays his own personal frustration with Common Cause and other backers of the measure; he's spent years trying to work with them on redistricting, and doesn't like their approach, from how the lines are drawn to the fact that Congressional districts aren't included. The measure only covers state legislative districts, and the districts for California's Board of Equalization.

Here's Ted's email:

I've been critical of the political strategy behind advancing redistricting reform by ballot initiative in this November's California elections. But looking at the web site put up by opponents of the initiative makes me think that perhaps it's worth fighting for reapportionment reform, regardless of the long odds.

In a display of chutzpah, the opponents -- state senate Democratic leader Don Perata and others -- have put together a web site called "Citizens for Accountability." The argument is Clintonian--it accuses redistricting reform supporters of doing precisely the thing (trying to protect politicians) that the opponents themselves are doing. Totally shameless.

Surprise, surprise. Democratic supporters of the redistricting initiative backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (a Republican) and former state controller Steve Wesly (a Democrat), are accusing Democratic regulars of trying to intimidate them. The party has come out against the redistricting measure.

Ted Costa, the Sacramento anti-tax activist best known as the original proponent of the 2003 recall of California Gov. Gray Davis, once told me that the recall was his second choice. He wanted to pass an initiative to strip California's state legislators of the power to draw their own districts. But the courts knocked a measure he drafted off the ballot. With the money he had raised for redistricting, he decided to launch the recall effort.

In 2006, looking back at all the political change his recall had produced, Costa looked back and said, "I would trade it all for a fair redistricting." Well, another redistricting initiative is headed to the ballot in California this November. And Costa doesn't like it at all.

The ballot initiative, sponsored by Gov. Schwarzenegger and others, would take the power to draw state legislative districts -- but not Congressional districts -- away from state legislators and instead give the drafting role to a citizens' commission. Such measures have a perfect record in California--they always lose. But opponents have been a little slow to organize, and perhaps the initiative can escape attack and attention, what with the presidential election and the gay marriage initiative on the same ballot. Don't bet on it, however. 

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.