Title: A Tale of Two Initiatives: Why the System Needs Reform. Now.

Author: Steven Maviglio

Date: March 12, 2010 10:52:43 AM or Fri, 12 March 2010 10:52:43

Summary: Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to present Exhibits A and B as evidence of why California’s initiative system is broken.
 
Exhibit A: The Part-time Legislature Initiative. This initiative, drafted by Sacramento Republican attorney Tom Hiltachk, was the brainchild of a Sacramento political consultant. The consultants created an Astroturf political group, “Citizens for California Reform,” and named a failed GOP Assembly candidate as its director. Then it created a website and Facebook page, and began circulating an initiative in Republican circles and on the web calling for a part-time legislature. Thinking it would fare well at a time when the legislature’s approval rating was under 20 percent, they were stunned when private and PPIC polls showed that it was grossly unpopular. The poor poll results scared off potential funders, including Steve Poizner. (Poizner, who’d spent millions defeating term limits reform in an attempt to endear himself to the right-wing of his party a year earlier, was a likely bet to fund the initiative to better position himself among conservativesfor the gubernatorial primary.)

Body: Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to present Exhibits A and B as evidence of why California’s initiative system is broken.
 
Exhibit A: The Part-time Legislature Initiative. This initiative, drafted by Sacramento Republican attorney Tom Hiltachk, was the brainchild of a Sacramento political consultant. The consultants created an Astroturf political group, “Citizens for California Reform,” and named a failed GOP Assembly candidate as its director. Then it created a website and Facebook page, and began circulating an initiative in Republican circles and on the web calling for a part-time legislature. Thinking it would fare well at a time when the legislature’s approval rating was under 20 percent, they were stunned when private and PPIC polls showed that it was grossly unpopular. The poor poll results scared off potential funders, including Steve Poizner. (Poizner, who’d spent millions defeating term limits reform in an attempt to endear himself to the right-wing of his party a year earlier, was a likely bet to fund the initiative to better position himself among conservativesfor the gubernatorial primary.)
 
Nonetheless, thousands of names had already been collected on petitions, and it was being pimped on KFI radio in LA’s “John and Ken Show,” a Tea Party hotbed, on an almost daily basis. But the effort didn’t have money behind it. Eventually, all those petitions were put through a shredder.
 
But even poor polling and the lack of funds didn’t stop the initiatives backers from backing off the concept. They took the original proposal and spiced it up by adding a 50 percent pay cut for legislators. Surely that would attract a Sugar Daddy to pony up the $2 million to $3 million necessary to land the necessary signatures, right? But Poizner was busy saving his millions to do battle with Meg Whitman. And even with the salary kicker added, poll numbers inched up only slightly.
 
Aside from the predictable support from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the backers were never able to win over an ideologue with a fat paycheck to pay for signature gathering. As a result, the measure is likely to die a quiet death in a few weeks when time runs out for signatures.
 
Exhibit B: The “Valero” Initiative to Suspend AB 32. Also drafted by Hiltachk, this initiative to suspend the state’s landmark anti-pollution law was the brainchild of right-wing legislators Assemblymember Don Logue and Congressman Tom McClintock, along with Ted Costa of The People’s Advocate. Costa has been involved in dozens of initiatives over the years, including the recall of Gov. Gray Davis, and was determined to make this a strong grassroots effort. He set up a web page, Facebook group, announced plans for a “signature bomb” to launch an online campaign, and sparked an authentic conservative groundswell to get the required signatures on the ballot. As recently as two weeks ago, his partner in the effort, Assemblymember Logue, told the San Francisco Chronicle that there was no oil company behind his effort. (It’s difficult to believe Logue was truthful with the newspaper, as he is one of the largest recipients in the Assembly of polluter dollars, including more than $14,000 from oil and gas companies this year alone.)
 
Enter two Texas oil companies, Valero and Tesoro, and their Sacramento lobbyists. Valero is the sixth largest polluter in the state; the company, along with Tesoro, have been spending millions to thwart federal climate change legislation in Washington, D.C. and wanted to bring that battle to California. With the clock ticking on qualifying the initiative, the two companies reportedly dumped $1.6 million into an effort to put the Logue/Costa measure on the ballot. Wary of the ragtag effort by Costa and Logue, they bullied them off the initiative and have hired two high-priced consulting firms. (Logue has stayed on as a proponent, though he’s apparently content with being muzzled by the initiative’s new public relations team.)
 
The committee behind the initiative has not yet filed its reports with the Secretary of State, though they appear to be overdue. Costa told The Los Angeles Times that the backers have already spent more than $160,000 on the initiative, which would have triggered reporting requirements long ago.
 
Costa is not taking all this sitting down. He’s blasted the hostile takeover of a grassroots initiative by corporate interests. According to the Sacramento Bee and Los Angeles Times, he will be taking an active role in leading the charge against the measure.
 
Nonetheless, signature gatherers, getting a premium of 90 cents per signature, are now outside your local Targets trying to convince Californians to help the two Texas companies get around our state’s air pollution laws. To me, it’s a little like Toyota funding an initiative that would get them around car safety requirements.
 
What’s wrong with this picture? Just about everything.
 
One initiative, dreamed up by political consultants, is dead in the water. Another, proposed by legislators and grassroots activists, has been hijacked by corporate interests from another state.
 
Hopefully, at the end of the day, voters will see through this mess and neither of these measures will become law. But you can’t help thinking how much the process would be improved if the Legislature had the power to amend these initiatives, tightened up contribution disclosure laws, and forced proponents to be more up front about who is funding these proposals.

Notes: 

More fields may be available via dynamicdata ..

There are no comments attached to this item.

Ratings