UPDATE: 1-31-08  From the Sacramento Bee...

The Sacramento Bee has disclosed the names of the sponsors of television advertising many of whom may have tried to circumvent disclosure per a suggestion by Fabian Nunez...

"Of the 17 Democratic legislators who have contributed to Proposition 93, only Assembly Democrats Karen Bass and Ted Lieu gave $50,000. Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, in October, asked members of his Democratic caucus to give slightly less than that, $45,000, to the term limits initiative. Six legislators have chipped in exactly that -- $45,000."

"Not a random figure, perhaps. Donors of $50,000 risk having to disclose their names in campaign advertisements. If numerous folks hit that threshold, ads must list the top two, according to the state Fair Political Practices Commission."

"So, you won't spot their names on TV ads, but the $45,000 donors are ... Senate Democrat Darrell Steinberg of Sacramento, and Assembly Democrats Mike Eng of Monterey Park, Alberto Torrico of Newark, Dave Jones of Sacramento, Fiona Ma of San Francisco and Hector de la Torre of South Gate."

Original story ....

There is almost no doubt in anybody's mind that California's legislature contains some of the most liberal, whacked-out politicians ever to vote against the best interests of the average California citizen/taxpayer. The majority of these politicians are corrupt, beholden to special interests and cannot seem to control their spending on social issues which have no tangible benefits other than generating feel-good headlines.

For the causal observer, term limits seems to be a good thing. It enhances the fresh flow of ideas and diminishes the likelihood that professional politicians, one in office, will be consumed with the need to stay in office rather than making the hard choices required to be fiscally prudent  and implement only those projects with a payback for all Californians.

The upcoming battle...  February, 2008  Proposition 93



  • Reduces the total amount of time a person may serve in the state legislature from 14 years to 12 years.
  • Allows a person to serve a total of 12 years either in the Assembly, the Senate, or a combination of both.
  • 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 another house.

While on the surface this legislation appears to reduce the total time a person may serve in the state legislature -- it really allows certain legislators to extend their time in their current office -- to the great detriment of the citizens of California.

Who it apparently benefits...

The two most visible recipients of any modification in term limits are the leader of the California's State Senate, Don Perata, and the leader of California's Assembly, Fabian Nunez. Both open borders supporters and profligate spenders on projects backed by "special interests." 

According to the Sacramento Bee, Perata's tenure has not been without controversy as mentioned in this 2004 item.

"The Don Perata investigation gets messier by the day, with new reports that his children are also subjects of the probe involving the senator's legislation and business interests. Senate Democrats are in a bind, as they don't want to over-react to an investigation that might be politically motivated but also don't want to be stuck with a leader who is hampered by the investigation or formal charges. At this point it still looks as if Perata will be formally installed as Senate leader on Dec. 6."

And the probe is still active as of November, 2007 according to the Los Angeles Times.

"Now several years old, the sprawling federal corruption probe of state Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata has spurred him to spend more than $1 million on legal defense, clouded his two decades in public life and swept up close associates and his adult children.
The investigation into the East Bay lawmaker's political and business affairs has largely operated out of sight in recent years, although FBI agents have searched his home and his son's."

"But public records, subpoenas and interviews with officials and others contacted by the FBI show that it has remained very much alive.
A grand jury has heard testimony and issued subpoenas to numerous businesses and government agencies that dealt with Perata. And agents have talked to potential witnesses and collected records about many issues championed by the senator.
These include bond measures for seismic work on a Bay Area transit system, billboards along freeways and federal approval of an airport roadway."

"One common theme is that campaign contributors and associates often stood to gain from Perata's actions, and subpoenas and the FBI's questions suggest that the government has been looking for any money that may have illegally flowed back to him or has not been properly disclosed."

And apparently Fabian Nunez also has a few questions being asked about his ethics as reported in Sacramento Bee.

"Even in this age of deep political cynicism, there might be a few pollyannas out there who believe state lawmakers are in Sacramento to focus solely on legislation."

"How silly of them. As we learned last week, state legislators spend an inordinate amount of their time soliciting contributions from corporations, unions and gambling tribes to help various charities."

"Some of these charities are legitimate. Some have connections to family members. Many exist simply to brand a lawmaker's name, and help support his or her political machine."

"Right after he pushed legislation last year to help the telecommunications industry, Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, D-Los Angeles solicited $120,000 from Verizon to help certain nonprofits. The money from Verizon and other companies flowed to some groups that appear legitimate – such as a charity that works to combat domestic violence. But it also went to voter registration drives and a group called "Collective Space," which lost its charitable status two years ago for failing to file tax returns. According to the Los Angeles Times, Núñez's staff directed how Collective Space spent its money, including organizing obvious photo ops such as "Fabian Núñez's Legislative Youth Conference."

It should not be overlooked that there are many well-paying jobs within a charity and a closer scrutiny of some charity operations reveals that some of these well-paid employees are politically connected.

So what are we to make of the widely-distributed report from the Center for Governmental Studies, titled "Termed Out: Reforming California’s Legislative Term Limits?" A report which is touted on their website as "a comprehensive analysis of California’s 17-year experiment with term limits." 

"Termed Out also analyzes Proposition 93, which will appear on the February 2008 ballot, and which would allow legislators to serve 12 years in either one or both houses. It concludes that the initiative would improve legislative expertise and strengthen legislative oversight, but it would decrease opportunities for challengers and allow many incumbent legislators to extend their time in office."

OK, it appears to be fair up to this point. But then goes on to state:

"This report analyzes the impact of the current limits on the California legislature. It finds that term limits have had positive, negative and neutral impacts. The report also concludes that allowing legislators to serve a total of 12 years in either house will encourage them to develop more expertise without any  significant negative consequences."

Which is something less than the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

The single most important negative consequence appears to be that the legislation creates a class of "professional politicians" who will be more concerned with remaining in office than they will be with honestly and ethically pursuing the people's business. That is, they will be overwhelmingly challenged to strike deals with special interests of all stripe to raise campaign funds -- and, in the process, sell-out their constituents.

It is also helpful to note that while the Center for Governmental Studies bills itself as a "think tank" and accepts 501(c)(3) charitable donations, it also notes that they are different from most research organizations as they have a "commitment to activism" and the advocacy of their positions. And while there is nothing wrong with than, one simply needs to look at their leadership to know that we are looking at a liberal, overwhelmingly democrat-influenced organization comprised of lawyers and professional social advocates.

Does longer political terms lead to increased corruption?

This is the central issue behind the term limits debate. I personally believe in the concept of a citizen-legislators as put forth by our founding fathers. A simple concept that allows a concerned citizen to become a legislator for a defined period of time and then return to the community which elected them. To face citizen scorn and censure should their term in office be something less than beneficial to their community.

Which brings to mind, the quotation of Lord Acton, a British historian of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, who observed that "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely."  One need only view the isolation of the political scene from the day-to-day affairs of the community to believe that, over time, any politician begins to believe that they are personally entitled to the prestige and power accruing from their elected office and will do almost anything to preserve that feeling.

Not increasing or tinkering with California's term limits is seems to be a common-sense antidote to the problem of increasing political corruption within our not-so-Golden State.

Of course, there are other reasons why I would urge someone to vote against the upcoming Proposition 93 which will appear on the February, 2008 ballot, but the prime one is:

The proposition itself was written by the very ethically challenged slime-balls who failed to deliver on their promise of a more impartial re-districting of the state in order to reduced the number of custom-designed (gerrymandered) districts which tends to preserve the political of a party or racial/ethnic majority.

Most of the politicians affected are either effete liberals who are ethically challenged and embroiled in public corruption investigations or who are willing to destroy the State of California by providing citizen-benefits to the overwhelming number of illegal aliens who have decimated our healthcare, education and judicial infrastructure.

That is not to say that all politicians are corrupt, stupid and otherwise acting against the best interests of the citizens who elected them. My favorite example of a smart, honest, incorruptible politician is Senator Tom McClintock who is openly acknowledged to be one of the best legislators in California's history. Unfortunately, the big money interests and the RINO (Republican In Name Only) Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, failed to provide adequate campaign support leading to his defeat. But then again, Schwarzenschnitzel has raised more money and spent more money than the recalled ex-governor Gray Davis. Something McClintock abhorred and would have widely publicized.

What can YOU do?

Defeat California Proposition 93 which would reward corrupt and unsuitable politicians with more time to plunder the pockets of the taxpaying citizen while engaging in social experiments with overwhelming negative consequences for the State of California.

Discuss this serious matter with your friends and others while arranging to maximize the vote.

Do not vote for any candidate or current politician who is willing to subvert the safety, security, sovereignty and economic strength of the United States or California -- including limiting an individual's right of self-defense for personal power, prestige or profits.

A reminder from a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:

Termed Out: Reforming California’s Legislative Term Limits|Center for Governmental Studies

California Secretary of State: Proposition 93

Title and Summary and Analysis by the Legislative Analyst

Arguments in Favor of and Against Proposition 93

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS