Term limit initiative rejected by voters

An initiative to alter legislative terms while giving lame duck incumbents a reprieve headed down to defeat as the statewide count continued to grow Wednesday morning.

As of 7 a.m., with about 95 percent of precincts reporting, Proposition 93 was trailing by six percentage points – 53 percent to 47 percent.

Both sides remained cautiously optimistic late Tuesday night.

"I'm hopeful, but I've never been willing to declare victory," said Kevin Spillane, spokesman for No on 93.

Spillane attributed the tight vote, in part, to confusion by voters over whether Proposition 93 would tighten or loosen term limits. Opponents claim the latter.

"Voters who were aware of what the initiative did were strongly against it," Spillane said.

Former state Controller Steve Westly, spokesman for Yes on 93, said voters responded to the message that tweaking term limits would make the Legislature more effective.

"Would it magically make our legislators better? No," he said. "But would it give them a chance to develop expertise in key areas? Absolutely."

Westly noted that the Yes on 93 campaign was beating poll predictions that had the measure losing by up to 15 percentage points.

"This is shaping up to be the upset of the election," he said.

Shortly before midnight, the measure was trailing in Sacramento, Yolo, Placer and El Dorado counties.

Statewide, Proposition 93 was leading in San Francisco and, by a razor-thin margin, in San Diego County. It was losing in Los Angeles and Orange counties.

At stake immediately was the future of dozens of lawmakers, including Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, who are scheduled to be termed out of office on Dec. 1.

Behind the scenes, colleagues had been watching Proposition 93 closely and some had jockeyed for position – more openly in the Senate – to succeed Núñez and Perata if the measure died.

The two legislative leaders had made it clear, however, that they do not intend to step down immediately, regardless of Tuesday's outcome.

Proposition 93 targeted existing legislative term limits, which allow up to eight years in the Senate and six in the Assembly.

The measure would reduce the maximum from 14 to 12, but allow all to be served in one house. It also would provide a "transition period" allowing extra years for incumbents.

Democrats Perata and Núñez stood to gain an additional six years and four years in office, respectively, from the ballot initiative.

By moving the state's presidential primary from June to February last year, the Legislature set the stage for lame duck lawmakers to be able to file for re-election immediately if voters passed the measure.

Because Proposition 93 called for expanding terms for legislators who serve only in one house but cut terms for those who switch houses, debate raged over whether it tightened or loosened existing limits.

Núñez helped craft Proposition 93, and his political consultant, Gale Kaufman, chaired its campaign.

Democratic legislators donated or raised more than $2 million for Proposition 93, including more than $1 million by Núñez and $350,000 from committees linked to Perata.

The California Republican Party contributed $100,000 to fight the measure, but Republican legislators were not major contributors for or against it.

Proposition 93's supporters argued that it would make the Legislature more stable and reduce dependence on special interests by allowing lawmakers to gain greater expertise without having to worry about constant fundraising or frequent career moves because of term limits.

Opponents painted the proposal as a desperate power grab by Núñez, Perata and other lame ducks to keep their jobs. They also argued the initiative was a thinly veiled attempt to expand term limits by allowing far more years to be served in a single house than is permissible now.

The Proposition 93 campaign raised more than $16 million, primarily from labor unions, corporations, health-care firms and other groups that do business at the Capitol. Opponents were outspent by more than two to one.

Ads supporting Proposition 93 claimed it would "strike a balance" that combines the "benefits of term limits" with the "benefits of experience."

But opponents lambasted Perata and Núñez, promoting allegations that Núñez spent campaign funds lavishly and noting that Perata has been the focus of a longtime investigation into whether he received outside income for influencing public policy.

Neither Núñez nor Perata has been charged with wrongdoing.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger endorsed Proposition 93, but the GOP's only other statewide officeholder, Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, led the fight against it and chipped in $2.5 million of his personal fortune.

Proposition 93 would permit every Assembly incumbent three extra terms, totaling six years, and every Senate incumbent one extra term of four years, provided they do not switch houses.

Thirty-four lawmakers are scheduled to be termed out this year and eight more in 2010.

About the writer:

• Call Jim Sanders, Bee Capitol Bureau, (916) 326-5538.