Blockbuster Democracy Blog

The End of Eymanism?

Joe Mathews — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:27:00 -0500

The Seattle PI web site makes that argument, after another defeat for Washington state's leading initiative sponsor, Tim Eyman, last week.

Does California Need a Title Board?

Joe Mathews — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:12:00 -0500

State Sen. George Runner, sponsor of a ballot initiative requiring citizens to show government-issued photo ID before voting, is so angry about the title that Attorney General Jerry Brown gave his measure that he's gone to court to get it changed. Republican operative (and friend of the blog) Tom del Becarro makes Runner's case here (along with a few gratuitous swipes at ACORN--ignore those and read to the place where the title Brown gave the measure is compared with a previous title on a similar measure).

The problem here isn't Brown, it's the system. California gives the attorney general -- an elected official and, in most eras, the state's second most prominent statewide politician -- the authority to write titles and summaries for ballot initiatives. And naturally, there have been constant complaints about the titles -- and suspicions about the political motives of attorneys general writing those titles.

If you want non-partisan titles, it would be better to put the power in a non-partisan body. The Swiss, who started direct democracy, have a government office of experts (made up of historians, scientists and lots of linguists) who draft not only the ballot material on initiatives and referenda but the actual language of the initiatives themselves. Closer to home, Colorado and Ohio have non-partisan bodies known as title boards that handle this work. There are sometimes complaints and litigation about their titles and summaries, too, but their record is stronger.

Split Decision?

Joe Mathews — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 02:32:00 -0500

Both races are formally close to call. But right now, it looks like a split decision on questions of gay unions. In Maine, the so-called "people's veto" of a new state law legalizing same-sex marriage leads by 4 points with more than half of the votes counted. If that holds up, the veto succeeds -- thus voiding the same-sex marriage law.

In Washington state, however, a referendum on a law there granting all the rights of marriage (except the title) to registered domestic partners appears likely to fail. That is, the law is being upheld, currently by a two point margin.

Monitoring Election Returns

Joe Mathews — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:08:00 -0500

For results on the Maine marriage referendum and TABOR initiative, Washington state's gay rights referendum and spending limit, and on other ballot measures all in one place, check out this page on Ballotpedia.

On Newsom

Joe Mathews — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:48:00 -0400

This blog post also appears at TNR.com. For a fuller treatment of the same topic, please check out my column this week at The Daily Beast.

In the days ahead, you may hear all kinds of explanations for why San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom dropped out of the race for governor. Poor fundraising. Poor standing the polls. Internal problems in his campaign. But none of them were decisive. Newsom had only one problem, but it was a problem to which there simply is no solution.

That problem is the name Brown.

This state has had only three Democratic governors in the past 67 years. Pat Brown. His son Jerry. And Jerry's chief of staff Gray Davis. So when it comes to successful California Democratic gubernatorial candidates, running as a Brown is pretty much a must. Newsom's challenge against Jerry, a popular former governor who was Newsom's only opponent, was a longshot even without the history. But, more than 40 years after Ronald Reagan unceremoniously denied him a third term, Pat Brown has been thoroughly rehabilitated. Simply invoking the name of Jerry's father serves as a shorthand for California's glorious mid-century past of growth and good schools. Jerry, despite having been a very different governor from his father, basks in that reflected nostalgia.

Newsom was the only politician in the state to tilt at that windmill. Democrats who don't have the baggage of Newsom (who famously had an affair with his campaign manager's wife) decided not to join the race. State Treasurer Bill Lockyer, who would probably make the best governor of any Democrat in the state, told me plainly for a piece in The American Prospect that he wasn't running because there was no way to beat a Brown in a Democratic primary.

One demonstration of Brown's strength was the timing of Newsom's announcement: He quit on the same day that Brown suffered the first real damaging news of the campaign, a San Francisco Chronicle report that his spokesman was secretly taping interviews with reporters.

So, more than seven months before the polls open, the Democratic primary is over. The only person alive who could beat Brown is the state's most popular politician, U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein. She has long wanted to be governor, but has given few indications that she'll join the race. And if Feinstein got in, Brown might well get out. The two are friends; Feinstein officiated at Brown's wedding four years ago.

The Power Is In the Clerk

Joe Mathews — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:18:00 -0400

Writing at Fox & Hounds Daily, Loren Kaye says he wants to be the clerk to the constitutional convention, and who can blame him? There's a lot of power there. Look for a real contest to develop if these initiatives pass next year and there is a convention.

Cliff's Notes on California Constitutional Convention Initiatives

Joe Mathews — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:23:00 -0400

UPDATED Oct. 29, noon:

After two readings, here's my cliff notes version of what's in the proposed initiative to call a constitutional convention.
Aren't there two initiatives?
Yes. There are. The first is easy to understand. It changes the constitution to permit the voters to call a convention directly - thus paving the way for the second initiative, which sets out how such a convention would be put together. There are a couple of pieces of news here--two new rules for how future conventions can be called. Any limits placed on conventions by the initiatives calling them would be "judicially enforceable." And the people would have to wait 10 years after the last convention before they attempt to call another.
What's the stated reason for fixing the constitution?
The current one is beyond saving. To quote from the initiative: "The current Constitution was drafted over one hundred years ago, and has been amended more than 500 times to a point where its original intent is no longer recognizable, and its implementation is no longer feasible." The goal of a convention: "to facilitate a functional government for our State."

So what about that all-important 2nd initiative? How would you describe it?
Long and complicated. It runs more than 8,000 words.
   Here are some highlights:
Get ready for your close-up, Fair Political Practices Commission.
The body - often criticized as toothless and ineffective -- is supposed to be a political watchdog, enforcing campaign, lobbying and conflict of interest laws at the state and local level. This initiative gives the FPPC a huge new role, effectively putting the five-member body in charge of the convention.
The five FPPC commissioners or their designees, reconstituted as a new convention commission, will make sure a convention is convened before June 3, 2011, determine its exact dates and locations, hire the staff and lawyers, and get to have the final say on the eligibility of selected delegates to the convention (and on whether any delegates need to be kicked out of the convention).
The FPPC also will be in charge of providing training and education for the delegates - a hugely important role, since the delegate selection rules are written in a way that will keep out just about anybody who has had any recent acquaintance with state government.
Let me make a fearless prediction: Ross Johnson, the FPPC's chair, is about to become very, very popular.
   Who is eligible to be a delegate?
   Anyone who is 18, a citizen of the United States and a resident of California -- and is not a convicted felon and has not committed the crime of being involved in the government and politics of the state in the past four years. The specifically banned include:
-anyone who has been appointed to a federal, state or local office, agency or commission in California, including state or county central party committees, since 2005.
   -anyone who has worked for or been an officer a political party, candidate, or candidate political committee formed or operating after 2005.
   -anyone who has been a registered state or local lobbyist or has received any income from such a lobbyist or lobbying firm since 2005.
   -anyone who has been a paid staffer to any state agency or commission since 2005.
   How are the delegates to be selected?
   Hold onto your hats. And take a deep breath. This is going to make your head hurt.
   There isn't one delegate selection system. There are three. The first is for selecting 240 delegates by Assembly district. The second is for selecting delegates by county. And the third is for selecting four delegates by Indian tribes.
The Indian tribe selection is relatively easy to explain. There are four federal districts for tribes in each state. The tribes in each of those districts powwow (apologies) and select a delegate.
The other two systems are more complicated. Let's take ‘em one at a time.
1.   Assembly district selection.
There will be 240 delegates selected this way-exactly three, no more and no less, from each Assembly district.
How? This is the lottery-jury-reality TV portion of the competition. There are two rounds of random selection followed by an election among those who are randomly selected. Yeah, some people are gonna get voted off the island.
Here are the dirty details. First, the state auditor selects at random the names of 400 people in each Assembly district who are residents of that district. The random selection can be done from voting lists, vehicle records, telephone directories or other databases. A bit of news here: you don't have to be a registered voter to be randomly selected as a delegate.
The 400 people in each Assembly district who are randomly selected get a letter from the auditor. From the population of those who write back to say they want to be a part of the convention, the auditor randomly selects 50 in each district and invites them to attend a two-day meeting conducted by the FPPC (in its role as the new Constitutional Convention Commission). If the auditor doesn't get 50 replies, then everyone who replies to the letter gets to come.
Those who reply and go to the meeting are asked to certify that they meet the delegate eligibility rules. Then the twice-randomly-selected from each assembly district elect by secret ballot three people from among themselves to be delegates. They'll also pick two alternates. (Bummer about the secret ballot, but - TV producers take note - the initiative has no language preventing the ballots from being opened on live TV with reaction shots of the losers).
2. County delegate selections.
There will be one county delegate for every 175,000 persons residing in a county of the state. Each county gets at least one delegate. But after that, you need 175,000 for another delegate. If you're a county with 1 person or 349,999 people, you'll have the same representation: one delegate.
   Who picks these county delegates? Politicians. (ALERT: Initiative is politically vulnerable right here!)
Here's the process. Each county will have a delegate selection committee of five people that generally will include two members of the county board of supervisors, two mayors, and one person selected by school boards in that county. These county delegate selection committees can't pick whomever they want. They have to establish criteria, have public meetings, have people apply, etc. Delegates are chosen by a majority vote of the five person county committee.
There are exceptions to this system. Delegates from the state's three largest cities - Los Angeles, San Diego and San Jose - are to be chosen by majority vote of their city councils. Before the fourth largest city, San Francisco, protests, let me remind you that San Francisco is its own county, so there'd be no point in exempting you. And before cities #5 (Fresno) and #6 (Sacramento) start complaining, let me remind you two that you're a lot smaller than the top 4 and that nobody really likes you.

The initiative uses Los Angeles and some scary long division to explain the big city exemption. The actual text:

"The number of delegates selected by the City Council shall be in proportion to the total population of the County in which the City lies, and the total number of delegates selected from the County, rounded to the nearest whole number percentage and whole number of delegates. For example, if a County has a population of 10,393,185 and a City within that County has a population of 4,065,585, the delegates from that County shall be selected as follows: (1) The total number of delegates allotted to the County shall be calculated by dividing the total population by 175,000, and rounding to the nearest whole number-in the example given, 10,393,185 divided by 175,000 is 59.38, meaning that the County will send a total of 59 delegates to the convention; (2) The proportionate percentage of the City population shall be calculated by dividing it by the total population of the County and rounded to the nearest whole number percentage-in the example given, 4,065,585 divided by 10,393,135, rounded to the nearest whole number percentage, is 39%, meaning that the City Council will select 39% of the 59 delegates from the County; (3) The applicable number of delegates is calculated, rounded to the nearest whole number-in the example given, 39% of 59 delegates, rounded to the nearest whole number is 23. Therefore, in the example given, the City Council will select 23 of the County's 59 delegates, and the County Delegate Selection Committee will select 36 of the County's 59 delegates.

   All right, now we return to the English language to discuss what the convention will be about.
   The convention is limited to four areas, all goo goo stuff.
   Parse the exact text for yourselves, kids:
"1) Government Effectiveness, including a method for periodically reviewing
each State agency, department, board and commission to determine whether it is performing its functions to meet the needs of the people of the State and whether it should have its enabling legislation modified, be merged into another new or existing entity, or cease to exist.
"(2) Elections and Reduction of Special Interest Influence, including the
initiative and referendum process, the election of state office holders, campaign finance, term limits, and ways to increase legislative responsiveness, reduce gridlock and produce full representation of all Californians.
"(3) Spending and Budgeting, including the budget process and related
requirements, the term and balancing of a budget, voting thresholds, mandated spending, and ways to increase fiscal accountability and efficiency.
"(4) Governance, including the relationship between the state and local
governments, and the structure of the legislative and executive branches of government.

   So what's not on the table?
   Raising or reducing taxes and fees. Specifically, the convention's revisions, amendments or suggested statutory changes "may not include new language, or
alter existing language, that (1) directly imposes or reduces any taxes or fees; (2) sets the
frequency at which real property is assessed or re-assessed; or (3) defines "change in ownership' as it relates to any tax or fee.'"
Also off the table is all the fun stuff: marriage or abortion rights, gambling or casinos of any type, affirmative action, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, immigration rights, or the death penalty.
   OK, so now that we know this thing may be a bloodless snoozefest, tell us: how will the convention be run?
   The chief justice of the California Supreme Court will kick things off at the big opening photo op. But the clerk -who is hired by the FPPC - has a ton of power. The clerk can speak for the convention when the convention is not in session. The clerk also may present a schedule and a plan, and will write a report on what happens. The clerk is a non-partisan position and must abide by the rules of an FPPC commissioner (can't be holding any other public officer, serving as an officer of a party or partisan organization, participating in campaign, or working as a lobbyist).
   Memo to CTA, the prison guards, the oil industry, big tobacco, the pharmaceutical boys: you best be sure the clerk is one of yours. Important point that might just come up some day: the clerk can be fired by the convention, but only by a two-thirds vote. (That's special protection-the convention runs on majority rules in just about everything else).
   How much is this going to cost Juan Q. Taxpayer?
   The delegates will be paid the same rate as the lowest-paid state legislators. The initiative requires that $1.75 per California resident be transferred from the state general fund to fund a convention. My quick back-of-the-envelope math puts the initial budget at $65 million. That can be increased, but there's a cap of $95 million. Which, strictly by a point of comparison, was the estimated 2009 payroll of the Los Angeles Dodgers. And they couldn't even make the World Series.
   The convention's sessions-all of them-must be public. A majority of the delegates must be present for a quorum. (My suspicion is that getting a quorum might prove difficult at times, given the fact that the convention delegates will not necessarily be the most public-spirited among us. But maybe we'll see).
   Will it ever end?
   The convention has a deadline of March 1, 2012 for completing its work. The time can be extended by a two-thirds vote of the convention, but there is an absolute drop-dead deadline of July 1, 2012. Within 7 days after the convention adjourns, the governor calls an election (that will be designated special but will be consolidated with an existing statewide election).
   That election can take place no later than Nov. 6, 2012.
   So if all goes well, the state could have a new constitution three years from next Friday.

Lockyer vs. Reed on Pensions

Joe Mathews — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:07:00 -0400

Over at Chris Reed's "America's Finest Blog" (a reference to San Diego's self-proclaimed title, "America's Finest City"), there's an interesting exchange between Reed and a spokesman for California treasurer Bill Lockyer over the demise of a 2005 initiative that sought to limit future pension benefits. The title and summary prepared by the office of Lockyer, who was then attorney general, helped kill the measure, but, as someone who wrote the book about the campaign, even without the title and summary, the pension initiative would have been toast. The issue is being revisited now because Lockyer, at a legislative hearing last week, blasted lawmakers of his own party -- he's a Democrat -- and said that pension obligations would bankrupt the state.

'We're Making Marijuana History'

Joe Mathews — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:04:00 -0400

That was the subject line of the first email I received this morning. Nothing like covering California initiative politics. What's the story? The idea of taxing and regulating marijuana -- the subject of multiple ballot initiatives that have been filed here -- has a hearing today in the California State Assembly.

Halfway Home

Joe Mathews — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:39:00 -0400

Bruno Kaufmann -- the Swiss-Swede journalist, president of the Initiative & Referendum Institute of Europe and the driving force behind the annual global forums on direct democracy -- has reached Manila, the halfway point in his family's six-month world tour of direct democratic spots. You can follow their travels here. And you can meet him Aug. 1-4, 2010, at the third annual global forum in San Francisco.