California Democrats Just Saying No to Reform

Arnold Schwarzenegger talks about blowing up boxes and reforming California politics. While some of the Governor's ideas are flawed, the Democrats should do more than just stand in his way. They should be offering their own agenda to make government more accountable to ordinary citizens instead of wealthy special interests.

We have seen a Democratic governor recalled due in part to voters' perception that he was too beholden to campaign contributors and a Democratic Secretary of State resign in shame after allegations that his 2002 campaign accepted laundered cash. You would think that legislative Democrats would figure out that voters are mad and want to see things cleaned up. You might especially think this would be true of Senate Majority Leader Don Perata, who is under FBI investigation for charges of corruption. Yet all the Democrats seem to be saying is "no."

Schwarzenegger clearly understands the power of a reform message. He ran his campaign on promises that he would sweep special interests from Sacramento and would not depend upon them for fundraising. On this count, Arnold has been a disappointment. He is raising money at a faster clip than even Gray Davis did and in amounts that only the most special of interests can afford.

The Governor wants to make good on his reform promises by tackling the issue of gerrymandering. After the 2000 census, Republican and Democrat legislators cut a deal to protect each other's seats by carving up congressional and legislative districts that are remarkably uncompetitive. The result is that of 153 races in the last election, not one seat changed party hands.

Arnold wants to take the power to draw district lines out of the hands of incumbents and put it in the hands of a panel of retired judges. Based on the other states that have tried this approach, it is doubtful that this alone will really result in greater competition for most races in the state. But rather than talking about a real solution to this problem, the Democrats merely want to argue about the timeline for Arnold's proposal. They are willing to accept an independent panel so long as it doesn't do anything until after 2010.

Beyond negotiating with the Governor about his reform proposals, Democrats would be wise to suggest their own. One idea comes from Berkeley Assemblymember Loni Hancock who has introduced a bill to provide full public financing to candidates that are willing to swear off any private fundraising. This "clean elections" idea is based on successful programs in Arizona and Maine that have allowed ordinary citizens to run for office instead of just career politicians backed by fat cat lobbyists.

Legislative leaders are balking at Hancock's idea because it would cost money, about $6 per voting-age Californian. But Arnold doesn't seem to have any qualms about spending money to make the wheels of democracy turn. The special election he called for this fall will cost us about $70 million. Combine that with the roughly $60 million it cost to administer the recall election and that's about the same amount of money it would take to rid our politicians of their dependence on campaign cash through public financing.

Democrats in the legislature could also tighten the campaign finance rules that Arnold is flaunting with his big money ballot committees. California law says that candidates for governor can only raise $22,300 from any one donor. Arnold was evading that law by raising unlimited sums for a ballot committee that he legally controls. After my organization, TheRestofUs.org, filed a complaint at the FPPC, Arnold appears have shifted strategy to raise $22,300 for his ballot committees but still accept another $22,300 for his candidate committees - double what the law should allow.

The Fair Political Practices Commission has issued some modest regulations to rein in candidate fundraising for ballot committees, but these rules have loopholes big enough for Arnold to drive his Hummers through. Given how important ballot initiatives have become to California politics, it makes sense to set limits for all ballot campaigns to prevent big donors from dominating initiative politics. The legislature could tighten the rules immediately by putting a bill placing limits on ballot committees on the Governor's desk. Then we would see if he's serious about reducing special interest money in politics or not.