Lawmakers Believe In Terms Limits But Oppose The Measure

By: EDWARD SIFUENTES - Staff Writer
North County Times
February 4, 2008

Curiously, politics enters into their thinking on Prop. 93

Proposition 93, a measure on Tuesday's ballot that would impose new term limits on state lawmakers, could benefit most local representatives, but most say they oppose it.

Lawmakers in the San Diego region's all-Republican delegation say the proposal was written by a handful of Democrats and is designed to keep key leaders, such as Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, in office.

"We took what could be a good discussion (about term limits) ... and we made it about incumbents," said Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries, R-Murrieta, whose district includes parts of Southwest Riverside County and inland North County.

Jeffries, a freshman assemblyman elected two years ago, said he supports term limits and might consider going along with a plan that does not grandfather incumbents extending their terms in office, but he opposes Prop. 93.

Supporters say the plan allows lawmakers to gain more experience in one house rather than rotating seats in Sacramento under the current term limits system, created under Proposition 140 in 1990.

According to a previous position paper by the League of Women Voters, in 1990, California voters approved Prop. 140, a constitutional amendment that limited the number of terms an elected state official could serve in the same office. As for the Legislature, Prop. 140 limited members of the Assembly to three two-year terms and members of the Senate to two four-year terms. A legislator who has served his or her maximum number of terms in an office is considered "termed-out" and is ineligible for re-election.

A legislator who has "termed out" in the Assembly can then run for Senate in his or her district of residence.

"Since the original law passed, California's got the most strict term limits in the country," said Richard Stapler, a spokesman for the "yes" on Prop. 93 campaign.

Stapler said the measure also had to include a transition period for incumbent lawmakers to avoid constitutional problems.

Opponents cast the proposition as a deceptive proposal that would result in more terms for the majority of legislators.

"This whole thing is rigged in a way to give 60 percent of incumbent senators 18 years in the Senate," said Kevin Spillane, a spokesman for the "no" on Prop. 93 campaign.

The measure would cut two years off the maximum time future lawmakers and most current legislators could serve, dropping it from 14 years to 12.

But it would let them spend all 12 years in one house of the Legislature.

It also includes a transition phase that would permit about a third of sitting lawmakers to serve more than 14 years. That's because only the time legislators have served in their current houses would count if Prop. 93 passes.

The initiative also would allow 34 lawmakers who are scheduled to be termed out of the Assembly or Senate this fall to stay in those houses for another four or six years, assuming they win re-election.

Among those who would benefit would be Sen. Jim Battin, R-Moreno Valley, and Assemblyman George Plescia, R-San Diego, both of whom would be termed out of office this year if Prop. 93 fails. Battin supports the measure, his press secretary said.

In a recently published Op-Ed piece, Plescia said he supported the measure because longer terms would allow lawmakers to gain experience to better address the state's problems, such as health care, transportation and education.

Battin, who spent six years in the Assembly and is in his sixth year in the Senate, would be allowed to serve six more years in the Senate, giving him a total of 18 years, said Sasha Horowitz, who authored a study on the effects of Prop. 93 for the Los Angeles-based Center for Governmental Studies.

Battin and Plescia could not be reached for comment.

Under the measure, 25 of the 40 state senators would be allowed to serve a total of 18 years, according to the center's analysis.

Nine senators would be allowed to serve a total of 16 years. Four senators could serve 14 years.

Three Assembly members could serve more than 14 years, according to the study.

Most area lawmakers said they would like term limits reform like the one that is in the measure, but many said they don't like extending terms for incumbents.

Sens. Dennis Hollingsworth; R-Murrieta, Mark Wyland, R-Carlsbad, and Assemblywoman Mimi Walters, R-Oceanside, would be termed out in 2010 without Prop. 93. Hollingsworth and Walters oppose the measure.

"I think term limits is a good idea," Hollingsworth said, but he added that giving incumbents more time in office is "self-serving."

Freshman Assemblyman Martin Garrick, R-Carlsbad, said he opposes the proposition in part because he would have preferred that term limits reform was accompanied with redistricting.

"We would like to have fair, redrawn districts," Garrick said.

Two years ago, lawmakers had hoped to link term limits reform, which Democrats wanted, to redistricting, which Republicans wanted. But Democrats, who control the Legislature, dropped the efforts to include redistricting.

The state Republican Party's chairman, Ron Nehring, issued a statement last month opposing the measure, saying the GOP wants "competitive districts and legislators frequently returning to the private sector to live under the laws they impose on their fellow Californians."

But some Republicans have broken rank with the party, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has said that he wanted to retain legislative leaders he had grown to trust.

Tim Hodson, executive director of the Center for California Studies at Sacramento State University, said there is good and bad in the measure. Whether one supports or opposes the measure depends on whether the good outweighs the bad, he said.

Hodson said he believes the measure would help create stability in the Legislature.

"The bottom line is, with the current system, a third of the Legislature is new every two years," Hodson said. "You can't run a Burger King that way."

Others, such as Sen. Wyland, disagree. He said government can be improved by redistricting reform that creates more competitive districts and term limits reform that doesn't include current lawmakers.

"Everyone has to make their own choices," Wyland said. Supporters of the measure, such as Sen. Battin, are "capable and the people would be well served if they could continue in office. For me, the larger issue is governance, democracy and the state."