[courtesy of The California Majority Report]

Proposition 93, the term limits reform initiative, today snared the coveted endorsement of The Los Angeles Times, the state's largest newspaper.

"The Times urges voters to reject the childish world of politics and to engage instead in the grown-up business of governing," said the editorial.

by Brian Leubitz [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

(Brian's Disclosure)

Today, in somewhat of a last-minute fashion, Common Cause of California endorsed Proposition 93, the term limits reform measure. Common Cause is one of many groups who are opposed to term limits in their current structure on principle grounds, but they wanted to get redistricting reform at the same time. Nonetheless, they have endorsed Prop 93, along with a heavy dose of pimping for their redistricting measure that has been endorsed by the Governor.

Check the press release over the flip.

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Bill Cavala
A veteran of over 30 years in Sacramento

‘We’ll show you’, says today's BEE editorial. Get this nonsense:

“As this (editorial) page has stated numerous times, these (term) limits are far too tight, particularly in the Assembly”.

With that opinion, you would assume the BEE would support Proposition 93.

“Lawmakers are often termed out just as they gain expertise in particular policy areas”.

With that opinion, you would assume the BEE would support Proposition 93.

Instead, the BEE chooses to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. They would allow legislators to serve 8-10 years in the Assembly and 12 in the Senate. Odd that the BEE didn’t pay for the signatures needed to make this option real rather than the product of editorial writers’ imaginations.

But the BEE wouldn’t support even their own reform unless it was made “conditional on passage of redistricting reform”. You know, a change rejected by voters five times – the last two years ago.

by David in Burbank [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

I am convinced that we will never fix the problems of our non-responsive California government though piecemeal changes. Term limits, which I voted for, have failed to produce the changes we wanted and have made it easier for money to dictate policy. All the measures we've passed to demand that money collected from certain taxes go only to certain projects have failed as well (and we face yet anther one of those in February.) Prop 13 has starved our treasury, but I can't afford to see it repealed. And all of these efforts have been an expression of our distrust in our government and were sold as the way to check their power.  For instance, no State run health care plan can ever pass public muster until we trust the politicians not to treat us badly as the insurance companies do.

Well, the solution is pretty obvious, but nearly impossible to achieve. We must be able to trust our government (and the public must perceive them as trustworthy.)  If we trusted them, we wouldn't need a super majority to increase taxes because we would be assured they would be spending it on something we needed. We could let our representatives have a career in their positions if the voters returned them to office and then benefit from their years of experience. And I am convinced that the only way to achieved that is to make a lot of changes all at once and have it sold by the people we trust most - ourselves!

Cont...

[courtesy of The California Majority Report]

The PPIC's latest statewide survey is out, and it reveals an electorate desiring action on health care and term limits reform, but skeptical of our state's financial future.

Prop 93, the term limits reform, has the backing of 47% of likely voters, with 38% opposed and 15% unsure. While this is below the coveted 50% threshold, when the specifics of the initiative are laid out to voters, an even more promising picture emerges. 67% of likely voters support the reduction of maximum time spent in the legislature from 14 years to 12 years, while 58% of voters (including 60% of Republicans), support allowing a legislator to serve a total of 12 years in both or either chamber. And while 66% of likely voters think term limits are a good thing, 69% agree that changes need to be made to the system.