Friday, July 20, 2007


THEY'LL NEVER ADMIT IT, Jul. 20, 2007 (McClatchy-Tribune Regional News delivered by Newstex) --
and in fact, go to great lengths to deny it -- but everything of importance that Democratic legislative leaders are doing this year is colored by their hope that voters will loosen up term limits next year.

That's especially true of Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, a young, ambitious politician who yearns to remain in his high-visibility position until something better, such as the mayoralty of Los Angeles, beckons, but would be forced out of the Legislature next year by term limits. The ballot measure he supports would cut total legislative service from 14 to 12 years, but allow someone to spend all 12 in one house, thus extending Nunez's career and those of other termed-out lawmakers.

It's more or less conventional wisdom in the Capitol, for instance, that one factor in the Assembly's 180-degree turnaround on ratification of new gambling compacts with Southern California Indian tribes was a fear that the tribes, which have demonstrated a willingness to spend lavishly on political causes, would commit millions of dollars to opposing the term limit measure headed for the Feb. 5 ballot.

Nunez denies that vociferously, insisting that he turned the compacts loose after a nine-month blockage because the state needs money from expanded gambling to close its chronic budget gap, even though ratification was considered a betrayal by his long-time labor union allies. Unions wanted amendments that would make it easier for them to organize casino employees.

More evidence of how matters are skewed by the pending term limit measure is found in what happened to a bill that would have allowed public access to police disciplinary proceedings. The measure, Senate Bill 1019, cleared the Senate but was buried in the Assembly Public Safety Committee after the head of the Professional Peace Officers Association sent messages to legislators that were it to proceed, rank-and-file police groups would oppose easing term limits. 'Ensure that it be understood that this will only be the beginning,' John R. Stites told legislators.

Even more graphic evidence of how term limits and legislative decisions are intertwined is found in this week's snafu over filing signatures to place the Nunez-backed initiative measure on the ballot.

Rob Lapsley, the California Chamber of Commerce's vice president for public affairs, e-mailed a memo to key supporters of term limit modification telling them that enough signatures had been gathered and 'the current plan is to turn the signatures in after the state budget is completed.'

Why? Because backers of the measure believe that it would bode ill were the signatures to be submitted to qualify it for the ballot while the Legislature struggles with an overdue, deficit-ridden state budget. Simply put, it would make lawmakers look like they want to extend their careers even though they're not doing their jobs.

When The Sacramento Bee got the memo, there was some behind-the-scenes scrambling and Lapsley then retracted the note, saying it was 'a miscommunication on my part.'

Lapsley, never believing that his completely truthful memo would surface, let the cat out of the bag. It badgered his bosses, and he had to become the goat and eat crow, to hopelessly mix animal metaphors.

Opponents of the measure, of course, gleefully jumped on their rivals' boo-boo. 'Apparently the speaker doesn't think the timing is right to make the case for extending politicians' terms when legislators have recently been seen pocketing extra tax-free per diem while simultaneously failing to perform their most fundamental responsibility and pass a budget,' the CA Term Limits Defense Fund chortled.

Nunez continues to insist that legislators will do their jobs diligently, not even thinking about the effect on term limits. Yeah, right.

Newstex ID: KRTB-0178-18279302


Delivered by Newstex LLC
via theFinancials.com