I know – it’s a dire blog title – but I absolutely mean it.
And almost every Republican political strategiest I know thinks so too (and I’ve heard from a lot since my original post).
Also, it appears the progressive Democrats agree with me as well – they’re opposing Prop 93 on their blogs.
The Democrat’s reason? If Prop 93 passes and the termed out Republican incumbents in their targeted seats run for reelection, it will be harder for the Democrats to pick up those seats. And they don’t like that at all.
Liberal Democrat, David Dayen, over on Caltics makes the argument that Prop 93 passing stands in the way of Democrats being able to raise taxes and control the budget without Republican involvement.
He thinks defeating Prop 93 will help them gain a two-thirds majority in each house.
I do too.
Here is his argument (bold emphasis is mine):
But in the medium term, the rule that keeps current legislators in office does impact the real opportunities Democrats have to make meaningful gains in the legislature. Term limits are certainly not the only reform necessary in Sacramento, or even the most important. I think eliminating the absurd stranglehold the minority has on budgets and taxes by reducing the 2/3 requirement on those votes is of paramount necessity. And the only way we’re going to get that is by actually getting a 2/3 Democratic majority in both chambers. And it’s a realizable goal, considering the excitement in 2008 with our game-changing Presidential candidate who will bring new voters into the process, whoever it is. I think we can get 54 Assembly members and 27 Senators by 2010. But it’d be a hell of a lot easier if we can run Democrats in rapidly bluing areas in open seats, instead of against incumbents like Bonnie Garcia and Shirley Horton and Tom McClintock and Abel Maldonado. We have a much better chance of winning those seats and getting real budget reform and tax fairness if this proposition does not pass, and those lawmakers get termed out of office.
———-
Honestly, I feel like Alice in Wonderland, falling down a rabbit hole into a strange world where things keep getting curiouser and curiouser. The Republican party has taken a position where it wants the incumbents in our most vunerable seats to be termed out, leaving the seat open and Democrats want to keep them there to fight for reelection. Something is not right here.
For some reason, my party has embraced the emotional position opposing Prop 93 because Republicans don’t like Speaker Fabian Nunez and pro Tem Don Perata —- completely ignoring the very real likelihood that this action will cause us to lose Republican seats this November.
OK – I admit, there’s a lot to be desired about both Perata and Nunez. I can’t and won’t defend either of them. But getting them out is not worth losing seats over. Especially, when whoever follows them could very well be a lot worse.
I know the logic cuts the other way too. It is illogical that Perata and Nunez would support Prop 93 knowing that it would be harder to pick up seats on their side. But their motivation is easy to see – they have put partisan opportunity behind their own personal gain of staying in the legislature. Their motivation may not be pure – but it is clear for all to see.
But our party’s motivation is muddy and jumbled – get rid of Nunez and Perata at the expense and risk of losing Republican seats, losing our ability to block tax increases and effect the budget. All in the name of term limits? (and, btw – Prop 93 doesn’t get rid of term limits – it just modifies them)
I just don’t get it. Really, I don’t.
And yes, as I said before when I wrote my first post on this – to avoid the easy criticism that this post is just an attempt by a termed-out legislator to get another term – let me admit that if Prop 93 passes it would allow me to run for another term. (** full disclosure **)
But that aside – please someone answer me why losing Republican seats is worth defeating Prop 93? How on earth does this benefit our party? I stand ready to have that discussion.
I’ve worked too hard over the years to elect Republicans to see our opportunities diminish. I’m going to fight to keep our seats all the way to the bitter end – even if it’s against the "official" Republican Party position.
And if the Field Poll today is right it’s already too late and Prop 93 looks doomed. But come this November, don’t say you weren’t warned. :-/
Progressive Democrats and the Republican Party standing in solidarity – it could only happen in California…… because I know I’m not in Kansas anymore.
February 4th, 2008 at 12:00 am
If you put aside THE BIG LIE where proponents are arguing that 93 STRENGTHENS term limits.
If you put aside that this ballot measure embodies the humbris if megalomaniak, Fabian Nunez, who walked away from nogotiations on redistricting and put this deceptive measure on the ballot himself (by gauging special interests to do it)…
Then we can get down to the crux if the matter — which is that you think that term limits are bad, and I think they are good.
I remember the days when legislators served in their Senate or Assembly seat for a generation. For the most part, they were kingdoms unto themselves.
As long as we are not going to have competitive legislative districts, I prefer turnover. And lots of it. So that voters have a more frequent opportunity to make their imprint on their local representative.
February 4th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Jon,
This is twice now you’ve not addressed my main point.
In our most vunerable seats: AD80 (Garcia), AD78 (Horton) and SD19 (McClintock), Prop 93 will term out our incumbents.
Because of that – we stand a very good chance of LOSING those seats.
It is a presidential year (bad for CA Republicans) and the Democrats have a ton more money than we do.
We are taking our best defense (our incumbents) and tossing them overboard.
So when your taxes go up – because we don’t have enough Republicans left in the legislature to stop it – remember that it is you that opposed Prop 93 because you prefer turnover.
February 4th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Senator Battin:
Please give it a rest. I am so sick and tired of hearing the lamentations, shrieks and cries from party leadership telling us how grateful we should be for all the valiant, hardwork Republican legislators have put in for us. I am so sick and tired of hearing about how evil will befall us if we lose Republican seats.
Seriously. Are you serious?
We are talking about California. We are talking about a state that has seen its budget balloon by billions, with spending outpacing revenue. This goes on ad infinitum.
How many times since the governor has been office have the Republicans sold out and played nice?
Remember the megabond packages that were passed a couple of years ago…you know..those junk bonds that Michael Milken would be proud of…
How do you think they get paid back?
In a state that has never cut its budget in any meaningful way for as long as I have been alive…it sure as heck isn’t going to be through belt tightening in Sacramento.
The Piper always gets paid…and guess who gets to pay The Piper…that’s right…the taxpayers.
They get to pay for these bonds that were for the most part fluff and will be wasted on government inefficiency and largesse or better yet, wont even benefit us.
Remember how the transportation bond was sold to the Inland Empire. What a joke that was…we all knew that we would get the short-end of the stick.
The water bond was pathetic and if you think our schools need more money…well…nevermind.
Senator…your tone is pretty offensive to me. Heaven forbid we might lose a couple of Republican seats. We would all be so lost without all these great GOPers in Sacramento.
Californians don’t prefer turnover. They prefer sanity and common sense.
Maybe…just maybe, legislators should actually demonstrate their worth and make an argument on their behalf instead of begging for another government handout and chastising us “because we know not what we do”.
So, in summation, in case I have failed to address your main point I will try to succinctly state it here:
We should not reward failure and California Republicans have failed us time and time again.
February 4th, 2008 at 12:00 am
I worked in Shirley Horton’s 2002 race (AD 78), and if weren’t for Term Limits, she
would NOT have been running for an Open Seat! Instead, incumbent Democrat
Howard Wayne likely would have sought and won a 4th term.
Term limits open up new opportunities for Republicans, like Shirley Horton, and
they also allow New Blood to emerge within solidly Republican districts.
Prop. 93 is now, “deader than Kelsey’s Nutmeg” and it deserves to fail tomorrow.
–
* “Deader than Kelsey’s Nutmerg” was a favorite phrase of L.A. sportscasting
legend Jim Healey.
February 4th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Wow – I know my comments would stir debate – I just didn’t expect vitriol.
Joseph – please, don’t let your anger get the better of you. If the Democrats get a 2/3 majority, they’ll give you real reason to be mad. They’re going to raise your taxes!
The “worthless” Republicans in the legislature have stopped them from doing that year after year. If we lose our slim margin, your taxes are going to go up – and fast.
We’ll all find out if having Republicans in office matter in November.
I believe they do.
February 4th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Senator Battin:
No vitriol or unbridled anger here. Just a lot of disgust and impatience for the perpetual mismanagement and neglect in Sacramento.
When the state government grows by billions and billions since Governor Gray Davis was recalled…and the current number of Republicans in the state legislature is unchanged…what does that mean?
I will tell you. It means the Democrats have a 2/3 majority already…they all just don’t have “D’s” next to their name.
You play up the impending doom that would catapult our state into the perverbial abyss if the Democrats get a 2/3 majority.
Please share with me and others why it is so important to hold on to those precious Republican seats when the budget has grown by billions and billions of dollars.
Your argument supposes that we will be worse off if Democrats acquire the 2/3 majority and imply that as long as we can keep that from happening, our valiant Republicans have and will continue to prevent increased taxes and bigger government.
Yet…the Democrats do not have a 2/3 majority and we have seen government grow by leaps and bounds.
Simply put Senator, our taxes have already gone up due to the irresponsible spending of the Democrats who have been aided and abetted by Republicans who lack the backbone, some would say “onions”, to beat back the rise of oppressive and expansive government.
They have simply been deferred.
If you honestly believe taxes have not gone up on Californians yet, you are delusional and fail to grasp that The Piper always gets paid. He might not get paid today or tomorrow…but sure as the sn rises and sets…he will get paid. And I and our children will be paying for some time to come in the future.
At the end of the day, many of us are tired of playing the lesser of two evils game. Hell, be it at 500 degrees or 1,000 degrees is still pretty damn hot.
February 4th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Joseph –
You have no idea of what you write. When the Dems have 2/3 control they will raise your taxes immediately. They will grow government beyond your wildest nightmares. You will pine away for the good ‘ol days when you just damned the Republicans.
Yes, spending has gone up – but not by my vote. Not by Bonnie Garcia’s vote either. She’s been holding the line. But the Democrat that may replace her will glady go along with the tax and spend frenzy us “worthless” Republicans have been blocking.
And – btw – before you go about damning us all in your anger, go back and see which Republicans voted for the budgets that grew government and save your rage for them (that list will surprise you).
If, and when, Prop 93 fails and when we lose seats – its on you and yours.
For me – my job is to get Republicans elected. And when they are – to keep them there.
I’m proud of that record.
And – Joseph – one last thing. If we’re so awful, why don’t you run? Put your name forward and your ideas. California needs strong leaders. Let me know when you open your campaign account. I’d like to be involved.
February 4th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Senator Battin:
I do appreciate your willingness to engage in this discussion and defend your point of view. For the record, none of my comments have been meant to be interpreted as personal indictments of your voting record. Simply put, I am not aware of your voting record and haven’t taken the time to review votes.
I don’t just damn the Republicans. I think the liberals in Sacramento, like those occupying the “Pervert Caucus” and who will be termed out if Prop. 93 fails, are ruining this state. But, those are my expectations for them, so I am neither surprised or really all that disgusted.
For me, your argument that if the Dems gain the 2/3 majority, my wildest nightmares will be realized. Unfortunately, my wildest nightmares have been realized since the recall where government has grown at an alarming rate.
My point is that taxes have already been raised and I base that on the following. Our governor and Democratically controlled legislature with the assistance of some Republicans has grown our government. Since there is absolutely no history or track record that would suggest that our legislature will cut spending…logic mandates that unchecked spending that exceeds revenues must utlimately be tamped down by greater taxation upon the people.
Republicans can argue that taxes haven’t been raised…but it is simply disingenous. And lets not even get into the litany of new fees that are no longer considered tax increases.
Sir, I am all for fighting the good fight and I do not disagree with you in that your job is to get Republicans elected and to keep them there. I fully understand your position.
However, that is not my position. My position is to advance Republican principles and values…not Republican members or candidates.
And I have come to the realization that it is better to let the Democrats and weak Republicans run this state into the ground and force structural change in the way we conduct business versus the current status quo, which is a long, torturous death that will inevitably lead to the same result.
I take comfort in knowing that the State of California does not own its own printing press. Eventually, sanity will be restored to state governance.
I would rather speed the process along.
With respect to running for office, I am simply not electable.
Again, I thank you for having the tenacity to argue your unpopular position. That takes guts. I applaud anyone who passionately stands for what they believe in…moreso than those who agree with me, yet sits on the couch.
February 5th, 2008 at 12:00 am
You’re right about there being no state Federal Reserve to print money Joseph. Thank god for that. On second thought, all the bonds we have been floating is almost like a printing press for them. I have complete faith that Arnold and the dems in charge will so screw up the state in the next few years that maybe Republicans will be able to pick up the pieces after the depression is over.