
The Legislature's current leadership, spearheaded by Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, D-Los Angeles, is urging voters to mark their ballots for the Feb. 5 primary in favor of a measure, Proposition 93, which would trim lawmakers' terms by two years but allow all of that time to be spent in the same chamber.
Proponents of the measure, including Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, say it strikes a reasonable balance between the need to elect new people with fresh ideas and the need to keep experienced lawmakers on the job.
But opponents, led by Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, say the measure is a trick and a power grab. They point out that Prop. 93 provides a transition period that would give current office holders a windfall term extension of up to 12 years in their current legislative house.
While the two sides battle, voter surveys show that most Californians are happy with the 1990 term-limit measure that restricted legislators to six years in the Assembly (three two-year terms) and eight years in the Senate (two four-year terms).
And voters have shown little interest in changing things.
"Consistently for the past decade, the number of voters who say term limits is a good thing is much higher than those who say it's a bad thing," said Mark Baldassare, a pollster and president of the Public Policy Institute of California.
"When we ask if the Legislature would be more effective if they stay in office longer, most voters say 'No,' " he said. "When we tell them how long legislators are currently allowed to stay in office, most voters say that's a good amount of time."
But some labor groups, business organizations and legislators say term limits need adjusting.
"Just about anyone will tell you that we need a Legislature with experience - but today, 12 of the 34 committee chairs in the state Assembly are freshmen," said Steve Westly, a former state controller and Democratic candidate for governor in 2006.
"That's not good."
Other supporters of Prop. 93 include the California Business Roundtable, the California Teachers Association and the Sierra Club.
Westly said the measure would allow lawmakers to settle into one house or the other and develop roots in the legislative system and expertise on the issues.
"Members of the Assembly, with two-year terms, almost from day one begin focusing on their next race," he said. "This would give them a chance to settle in."
Not so, said Poizner, a Republican whose major complaint is that current office-holders would benefit from the passage of Prop. 93 - including the legislature's two top Democrats who otherwise would be termed out of office at the end of this year: Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, and Núñez.
If the measure passes, Perata, who is in his second full term, would be able to run for one more four-year term in the Senate; Núñez, who is in his third term, would be eligible for three more two-year Assembly terms.
"There's no question that Proposition 93 was written in a clever way in order to lead voters to conclude that it would shorten terms - that's totally false," said Poizner. "It will lengthen them."
Poizner argued that the average career in the Legislature today is six or seven years. Passage of Prop. 93, he said, would ensure that most lawmakers would serve the full 12 years.
"I don't think it's a good idea to lengthen terms; it's bad for California," he said. "Voters passed term limits with the idea of limiting career politicians in the Legislature for good reason."
So far, voters have not focused much on Prop. 93, although media campaigns began this month. Supporters of the measure have received contributions from the teachers union and other unions, and businesses including Chevron and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. That campaign spent about $5.7 million through the end of December but is expected to more than double that amount by election day.
The opposition campaign, with support from Poizner and a Virginia nonprofit that seeks to limit career politicians, U.S. Term Limits Inc., has spent about $2 million but has about $4 million more in the bank, according to reports filed last month.
A Field Poll conducted in December found just 25 percent of voters had heard or seen anything about the proposal. When voters were read a summary of the measure, 50 percent said they would support it.
A new Field Poll on the proposition is expected to be released Thursday.
Poizner said the measure's placement on the February ballot was no accident. If Prop. 93 passes, incumbents would have time to file their paperwork and run in the June state primary.
"The whole thing is a power grab," he said.
Westly conceded that there are aspects of the proposal that "could have been done differently." But he insisted the measure is still a good idea.
"If you are going to wait for perfection, you will be waiting a long time," he said. "This is a good-government proposal."
(sfgate.com)