California’s governor supports the measure, while opponents such as the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association call it a “power grab.”
By Melonie Magruder / Special to The Malibu Times
Proposition 93, also known as the Term Limits and Legislative Reform Act, is a proposed state constitutional amendment that seeks to reconfigure term limits of state legislators, 18 years after Proposition 140 first created them.
Currently, legislators can serve three, two-year terms in the Assembly and two, four-year terms in the Senate for a total of 14 years. Proposition 93 would limit them to 12 years of service, but that could be spent entirely in the Assembly, the Senate or a combination of both.
For opponents of the measure, the sticking point is that passage of the amendment provides a transition period to allow current members to serve a total of 12 consecutive years in the house in which they are currently serving, regardless of any prior service in the other house.
Opposition was swift from organizations like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and from Steve Poizner, the California state insurance commissioner, who claimed that the proposition was a “naked power grab” by legislative incumbents.
The measure’s chief political backers in Sacramento are State Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez and Senate Pro Tem Don Perata, both of whom will have to leave office if the proposition fails.
Supporters of the bill include the California Teachers Association, the SEIU and the California Democratic Party.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger recently published an opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times, wherein he wrote, “The reform of term limits-along with campaign financing and redistricting-will create fundamental and positive change in Sacramento. The Legislature will be more representative of the people and less beholden to special interests. Its members will have more time to do their jobs well and, most important of all, problem-solving will be a higher priority than partisanship and ambition.”
Proponents of term limits say that they can prevent a certain lax approach to legislating for representatives fighting to accomplish true reform.
On the other hand, opponents say term limits can prevent legislators from building necessary alliances within a legislative body and working diligently over time to build consensus on policy before they are termed out of office.
Schwarzenegger wrote, “Our legislators should be given an opportunity to become outstanding at their jobs. To become policy experts who can make the kind of informed and forward-thinking decisions this state desperately needs.”
Assemblymember Julia Brownley was cautious in her assessment of Proposition 93.
“Although not perfect, I support it,” she said. “I don’t believe that the revolving door created by our current term limits has served the system well. Some legislators will be able to stay longer, but that happens under the current system when they simply run for office in the other chamber of the Legislature.
“On balance, I believe that the experience, expertise and working relationships that only time can build is preferable,” Brownley concluded. “And the voters continue to have the ultimate decision at re-election time.”
State Sen. Sheila Kuehl held a neutral position. “I have no comment on Prop 93,” she said. “I don’t think people holding office should [comment on it].”