Journalistic Coverage of the ‘Term Limits’ Initiative Has Been Pitiful (and Irresponsible)

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Bill Cavala
A veteran of over 30 years in Sacramento

The press corps in California deserves condemnation for the manner in which they are covering the effort to change term limits by initiative.

The initiative would allow individuals to seek election and reelection to the same branch of the legislature for a period of 12 years. Currently they may seek election and reelection to different branches of the legislature for a total of 14 years. So the initiative limits the current lifetime ban on reelection to two fewer years.

That means the issue for voters is whether a trade of 12 possible years in one house of the legislature versus 14 years in two Houses (current law) is a good trade – and why?

No news story or editorial has focused on this fact.

The title and summary of the ballot measure adopted by Attorney General Brown makes it clear that this is the issue.

But the press corps reported only the allegations that the title and summary was drawn up with partisan concern. Or to favor specific individuals. That continued to be the story even after the Republican Supreme Court threw out those allegations.

Because the proposed change would allow the current leaders of the Senate and Assembly to seek additional time in office through the reelection process (which may explain their support for the initiative), the press corps obviously felt an obligation to explain that fact to voters.

But the next step was the manipulation of the issue by the Governor. Because Legislative leaders supported the initiative, Schwarzenegger attempted to use that fact to extort action from them on redistricting. Because the press corps generally supports changes in the redistricting process, this extortion was not condemned (as it would have been had the issue been casino gambling). When the redistricting initiatives failed to receive support, the press corps sought to punish Legislative Leaders by focusing on other actions they took, explaining that those actions would hinder the effort to modify term limits.

All inside baseball, and very irresponsible.

Are we saying that term limits produces less responsible, honest, effective, aged, energetic, well dressed Speakers than was the case prior to the imposition of term limits?