|
VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 93 - THE PHONY TERM LIMITS MEASURE
Download the CRP Official Voter Guide here.
Proposition 93's deception continues to be exposed daily. At last count 15 newspapers in the state have editorialized strongly against the measure. Most recently, the State Capitol's paper of record, the Sacramento Bee, along with the Orange County Register, the Modesto Bee and the Santa Cruz Sentinel added their names to the growing list.
Here is a sample of what they had to say:
From the Sacramento Bee :
"Voters should reject Proposition 93 in the hope that the next pair of legislative leaders can show more courage and deliver real results."
From the Orange County Register :
"This is yet another Sacramento sleight of hand. Under the guise of shortening legislative terms, the initiative's immediate effect would be to lengthen current lawmakers' terms in office. Why would any voter want to reward Sacramento's current stewards of the public purse with more time in office in light of the $14 billion budget deficit they have created? They've done enough damage with the time already allotted."
From the Modesto Bee :
"On its face, that sounds reasonable. But the real purpose of the ballot measure is to give current leaders, Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez and Senate President Don Perata, and 40 other members a chance to extend their time in office -- and in power."
And from the Santa Cruz Sentinel :
"Proposition 93 is backed by many politicians acting out of blatant self-interest, such as Democratic Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and Senate President Don Perata..."
From January 4th coverage:
As 2007 came to a close and 2008 gets off to a start, the truth about Proposition 93 continues to be exposed. This weekend, the Associated Press, took a look at the man behind Proposition 93, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and at his quest to stay in power.
"But as the year wore on and the Legislature accomplished little, sentiment shifted. Now Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, the longest-serving speaker in California's era of term limits, is struggling to extend his political career."
"Questions about his campaign spending and his wife's income, along with low public approval ratings for the Legislature, have undercut Nunez at the most inopportune time. In just more than a month, California voters will decide whether to change the state's term limits law and give Nunez more time as Assembly speaker." (Assembly speaker struggles to extend his term, hold powerful seat, Associated Press, By Samanta Young, 12/30/07)
Last week, Sacramento Bee ran a story analyzing the measure – and coming to the conclusion that it would allow current lawmakers to stay in office longer than they would under our current term limits law. Here is an excerpt:
“Proposition 93, on the Feb. 5 statewide primary ballot, would reduce total years that a California lawmaker could serve by two, to 12, but would allow all to be served in the Senate, Assembly or a combination of both.
“The boon to incumbents stems from a provision allowing sitting officeholders to serve their entire careers in one house, guaranteeing senators at least one extra term and Assembly members three.
“Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, both scheduled to be termed out next year, would receive an extra six years and four years in office, respectively.
“Because the Legislature switched the state's presidential primary from June to February, passage of Proposition 93 would allow Núñez, Perata and 30 other lame-duck lawmakers to file for re-election immediately.” (Prop. 93 Provisions Reduce Years In Office But Aid Some Incumbents, Sacramento Bee, By Jim Saunders, 12/26/07)
The Contra Costa Times took a look at the lack of progress on major issues in the Legislature this year and the negative prospects of progress on those issues with a $14 billion budget deficit looming. These same legislative leaders who have been unable to tackle the most pressing issues in California are the masterminds behind Proposition 93.
“The Legislature spent much of 2007 discussing rising health-care costs and dwindling water supplies, but none of the 750 bills signed into law delivered major reform on either front.
“Instead, what Californians will get come Jan. 1 is a variety of legislation going into effect that addresses environmental and privacy issues, foster care and elder abuse, gang prevention and toy safety, among other topics.
“The Assembly's health-care- reform bill had ‘gone limping into the Senate,’ said Assemblyman Charles Calderon, D-Industry.
“And water should have been a major focus but wasn't, he added.
“Addressing those issues could be even more challenging in the future, lawmakers said, due to a projected $14.5billion budget shortfall.” (Great expectations unmet by lawmakers, San Jose Mercury News, By Steve Harmon, 12/22/07)
Sacramento Bee Columnist Dan Walters also rang in the New Year by reminding readers of the lack of progress in Sacramento on the real issues in 2007. He leads off with this:
"It would be difficult to devote an entire column to what happened in California's political world over the past year, because so little did happen." (Year Was Filled With Nonevents, Sacramento Bee, By Dan Walters, 12/31/07)
Finally, the Field Poll was also released showing weakening support for this measure. The poll also found that many Californians are not yet aware of Proposition 93 or the deception behind it. Make sure your friends and family know the truth about Proposition 93.
Previous News - Steve Poizner Takes On Phony Term-Limit Initiative
Excerpt from Editorial, Los Angeles Daily News - November 8, 2007)
Full Article Text: http://www.dailynews.com/ci_7409697
You've got to hand it to California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner. He's a shrewd politician who has picked just the right battle to shake up Sacramento and come out as the public's champion. Plus, he's using $1.5 million of his own personal fortune to do it.
Politicians are mainly in the business for their own self-aggrandizement. If they happen to do some good for the people along the way, all the better.
Someone ought to stand up for the people and tell the truth about this deceitful initiative - and the politicians who benefit surely aren't going to. Indeed, the big-money special interests are already being tapped for support.
And it seems Poizner is that guy. He's got the funds, the guts and the desire for future office to do it.
EDITORIAL BY STEVE POIZNER, November 16, 2007 - Orange Register
California Focus: Term-limits Reform Measure A Sham
Ballot initiative would actually extend the power of top legislative leaders
Accountability in government. The will of the people. Honesty in elections. These core principles, no matter how often they are debated, form the foundation of American politics and represent core values shared by all of us regardless of party.
But every one of these principles is under attack in the form of Proposition 93, an initiative on the Feb. 5 statewide ballot. Prop. 93 is one of the most deceptive and dishonest measures that Californians have been asked to vote on in many years. It's a sham proposal to weaken term-limits, masquerading as an effort to "reform" and strengthen them.
Put simply, Prop. 93 is a trick. It is intentionally designed to fool the people into thinking they are voting to reduce terms for state legislators when, in fact, it contains a special loophole to give 42 termed-out incumbent politicians more time in office. In fact, it will dramatically increase terms for 80 percent of California's legislators. Prop. 93 doubles the number of years a politician can serve in the Assembly from six to 12 years and increases Senate terms by 50 percent - from a total of eight years to 12 years.
You won't be surprised to learn that Prop. 93 is written by career politicians for the benefit of career politicians, and funded by millions of dollars from special interests with business before the Legislature.
The entire strategy behind the Yes on Prop. 93 campaign is smoke and mirrors. The politicians and special interests working to pass Prop. 93 are counting on voters never learning the facts about the initiative's real impact because they know they could never win an honest vote to weaken term limits.
That's why I've decided to lead the opposition to Prop. 93 and work to ensure that Californians know the truth about this scam initiative.
Term limits serve as a check on the powerful. They force career politicians to relinquish power and create a chance for new people, hopefully with innovative ideas, to be elected to public office. They help open up the process and create opportunities for more women and minorities to run and be elected.
Term limits also provide the only real accountability we currently have on legislative politicians. The legislators have gerrymandered their own districts so completely that it's virtually impossible for an incumbent to lose or for a legislative seat to switch parties.
The numbers tell the story. Of the 459 elections for Assembly, state Senate and Congress since the gerrymander of California's legislative districts following the 2000 Census, only a single seat changed partisan hands. In those same 459 elections, only a single incumbent lost.
Today, about the only way politicians ever leave office in California is when they're termed out, thanks to our existing term-limits law.
To add insult to injury, the legislative leaders behind Prop. 93 promised they would pass meaningful redistricting reform and promote reform of term limits and California's redistricting process as a package to gain support for their effort to stay in office longer. But they didn't.
If Prop. 93 passes it would remove a check on powerful politicians. It's also likely to permanently kill any hopes for really reforming the way the state's legislative districts are drawn every 10 years. If politicians and special interests get what they want by extending their terms and staying in office there will be no incentive in Sacramento to ever reform redistricting. They'll be even more powerful than they are now and better positioned to defeat any citizen-sponsored initiative to make our legislative districts fair.
These legislative leaders have prioritized extending their terms in office over improving California's water policy, improving health care or reforming redistricting. The cynical career politicians behind Prop. 93 do not deserve to be rewarded with more time in office - or with your vote Feb. 5 for this bogus ballot measure.
Please join me in supporting our current term limits law by voting No on Prop. 93.
Back to News and Press
|
