Introduction

Introduction If Americans distrust politics, politicians, and government, California is --yet again --leading the way as a harbinger of public policy trends in the United States, pushing the boundaries of direct democracy in lieu of the representative democracy we used to think we wanted. Property tax reform with the passageof Proposition 13 in 1978 is the classic example, but so, too, is the recent expression of anti-immigration and anti-affirmative action feeling. As a state that draws its political traditions from the Progressive Era in the early part of this century, California likes to think of itself as possessedof a strong civic culture led by citizen politicians. The state moved in another direction in the 1960s and 1970s, under Assembly Speaker JesseUnruh, who made the state legislature the most professional state legislature in the country. Unruh's foray into professionalism also set a trend, but it was rejected by the citizens a quarter of a century later with the passageof Proposition 140 that imposed term limits and cut the size of the legislative staff by 40 percent. The conflict between "professionalism," as represented by sophisticated staffing, and "amateurism," as represented by term limits and law by initiative, is characteristic of the schizophrenic nature of California's political culture. The unifying c;haracteristic is the enduring Progressive1 belief that politics and powe~rare not to be trusted. A strong civil service --protected from politi(:;al interference 30 --is another Progressive tradition based on 1:heassumption that professional civil servants (as opposed to professional politicians) will act rationally, not politically. The goal is to take "politics" out of the process, eliminating, as much as possible, the opportunity to make deals, or the undue advantage available to insiders. As long as power is divided between many decision-making allthorities, no one can usurp it for their own use. The problem with professional staffing, apparently, is that it was subordinated to politicians. The dilemma is that rationality and tile related goal of efficiency are not major objectives of government --at least not compared to other values such as fairness, or getting things done. Dividing authority makes it difficult for trad:itional graft and corruption to flourish, but it does not make decisions easier. So, the state lurches its way through public policy by passing initiatives that lC are often flawed because they do not go throlLlgha legislative process t k that requires compromise. They are also frequently written in such a way as to make changes in them an expensive, difficult, and 31lD sometimes insurmountable prospect. Whethler or not we have gone F too far in the passage of recent initiatives remains to be seen, but so at many, and such costly initiative campaigns may end up fostering an part initiative movement to reform the initiative process itself. Without initiative reform, we appear to be moving closer to direct democracy, even if we know that direct democracy cannot work in a complex r diverse society. 1 Government by initiative --and other external variables such n as the political revolution in the last Congress --has left us with several political issues to look for in the coming year: Term limits and their consequences,including the changing dynamics in the state legislature is Coping with the results of the latest initiatives --campaign be finance; local funding; affirmative action, etc. Ice 31 .: Relations with local government, given welfare reform's the e block grants from Washington and the passage of party Proposition 218 quic1 appar what years the go Pending statewide elections in 1998, especially for could :\ governor there i dawni; bicker: see grf Term Limits Assem than m Govea. The 1996 election was the last campaign for the Old Guard, strong 1 those in office when term limits were approved in 1990. Although "wedge some will play political musical chairs and move from the Assembly especla to the Senate for their full allotment of six years (3 two-year terms), and eight (2 four-year terms) for a total of fourteen years in Sacramento. Some will be returning to office after a hiatus. And govemn some, particularly on the Democratic side, will come out of staff other ha positions to succeed their bosses, thereby extending their time and start. Bl their experience. The 1996-97 legislative seasonwill see 32 freshmen than his in the 80 member Assembly alone. Democrats control bot.h houses in and long the 1996-97 legislative session: 24 to 15 in the Senate (one limits in independent); 43 to 37 in the Assembly. According to a study of the 1996 election results by The Los Angeles Times, however, the new S legislature will pretty much resemble the 1988 legislature --the last staffs are elected group before term limits were adopted. There will be law. Bef significantly more Latinos (30 percent up from 9 percent) and women that elimi (40 percent up from 17 percent) on the Democratic side, and fewer reliance c women on the Republican side (8 percent, down from 18 percent).2 Accordin) These changes might have occurred in any case, given the changes in more to tl . 32 's the electorate and the growing "feminization" of the Democratic party. The odds are that they would not have happened quite so quickly, however, if incumbents could have stayed in office. What difference the limits make, however, is not readily apparent because there are so many other variables in politics, such as what their relationship will be with a governor who has only two years left in his term. If there is gridlock between the legislature and the governor,3 state activity that affects the daily lives of Californians could shift to the administrative departments. Or, alternatively, if there is recognition in Sacramento similar to what appears to be dawning in Washington that Americans are not happy with partisan bickering and deeply unhappy with governmental gridlock, we could see greater moderation on all sides. Certainly, the new Speaker of the Assembly, Cruz Bustamante, is more moderate a Democratic leader than many of his peers. Relationships are a two-way proposition and Governor Pete Wilson has been known to show both moderation and 1, strong partisanship. It is to Wilson the G.O.P. looks to define 1 "wedge" issues, but will he want to go out of office that way, )}y especially when it is not clear where he might go? ;), The relationship between the two elected branches of government may come down to personality as much as party. On the other hand, relations within the legislature are off to a much smoother start. Bustamante acceded to the Speakership with much greater ease men than his predecessor in that raucous battle orchestrated by the master :sm and longest-serving Speaker, Willie Brown, who chose to face term limits in Sacramento by becoming the mayor of San Francisco.4 :he, Still, the fact remains that many legislators are new, and their s1 staffs are more likely to be skilled in winning elections than making law. Before the passage of Prop 140, opponents of term limits argued Den that eliminating experience from the legislatlLre would mean a greater r reliance on lobbyists, to the benefit of "the Special Inter~sts." 2 According to at least one lobbyist, that might be true, but what is )1ll more to the point is that the lack of experience means the new 33 legislators and their staffs are unsure of whom to trust and have been turning --not to lobbyists --but to their party caucUlses.When the ~1 legislature is evenly divided, the consequence of taking positions by II party means that compromises are harder to come by. The traditional sf guides on positions that make compromise possible are unknown to re new legislators: long-time associates,trusted advisors in the PJ bureaucracy, scholars, constituents, and so on. The party, on the other e, is hand, is known, and knows that it needs to differentiate itself from th the other side. The combination of unfamiliarity and the need to trust someone --or something such as the party --only increases the tendency for gridlock. IS prl The lack of experience in staffing is an issue of concern to m( ter long-time legislature watchers in Sacramento. In addition to the loss of staff available to each legislator, the Republicans also eliminated a CO] for large number of experienced committee staffers wh~~nthey took ele control of the Assembly in 1994. While ostensibly neutral, most were likc Democrats who were beholden to the Speaker and-committee chairs who hired them. Their absenceleaves another gap in institutional Re] cor know ledge and memory. Th, Term limits also means that backbenchers move into poI her. leadership positions at a much faster rate than before. To those who lea( want to "make a difference" in a hurry, the opportunities abound, but con the lack of experience on substanceis matched by the lack of ethr experience in the mechanics of the process. A short time frame may aIw; result in state law that is better received because it takes less time to divi get, or it may be more frustrating because it fails to satisfy all of the stufj stakeholders. Or, it may mean less legislation because those at the still- table don't know who else ought to be there to effect the kinds of Cali: compromise it takes to get agreementbeyond the party --a process bet\\ that used to take a decade or so. the to Legislative terms may reflect the blowing political winds more readily than they have in the past when incumbents could wait out the storms because their constituents knew them better.

Load more