California Props All Going Down?

Propositions 93 and 94-97 face shaky polling in the final Field Poll. On Prop. 93, the term limits measure, 39% support and an identical 39% oppose, with 22% undecided. The support has decreased almost entirely because of Republicans. They used to favor Prop. 93, and as they've become more aware, they've switched to opposing it. Independents will be the crucial swing vote, and they too split evenly between favoring and opposing. Absentee voters are dead even, too, so neither side has a lot of votes banked.

What's really interesting is the question that says, "Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is advocating a yes vote on the term limits reform initiative (does/did) Governor Schwarzenegger's support of Prop. 93 make you more inclined to vote yes, less inclined to vote yes or (have/had) no effect on your vote?" 11% say it makes them more inclined, 9% says less, and a whopping 63% say it has no effect. Wow. I was hinting that Arnold wouldn't much matter on this legislative question but now we have some data.

On the tribal gaming agreements, Props. 94-97, 42% support and 37% oppose. When the question is just asked "Do you favor more or less slot machines at Indian casinos," 42% support and 43% oppose. So the agreements are in trouble, too.

I do think it's still a toss-up. Democrats and perhaps indies are going to get a lot of mail in favor of the measure. But the rule of thumb is that an initiative needs to be more out in front right now. Same with 94-97.

California Initiative Update

I just saw the first ad for Yes on 93 on cable; you can view it here. The No on 93 folks also have a couple ads cut; they're available here.

Unfortunately, it's going to be very hard for both sides to get their message out. Not only are we going to start seeing at least some resources from the Presidential candidates at some point, but the tribal gaming initiatives are due to swamp every other ballot measure and take all of the oxygen out of the room. I'm already sick of their ads.

On Friday, the Pechanga Band of Temecula, one of the big four tribes who stand to gain from passage of Propositions 94 to 97 and 17,000 new slot machines, contributed $30.8 million in support of these propositions. This brings the total to the yes on 94-97 campaign to $68 million dollars, dwarfing not only the amount raised by opponents who seek to overturn the legislature’s approval of the slot machine compacts. But all contributions made on the other ballot measures being considered February 5, 2008—including term limits.

This may be only the beginning of money spent, almost exclusively by the tribes on the yes side.

The second largest amount of money on ballot propositions in this cycle is on the “no” side of the Prop 94-97 gambling propositions, and most of it also comes from tribes—those who are not part of the arrangement with the four tribes. At least $11.5 million of the opposition funding comes from “Tribes for Fair Play” out of what appears to be $28 million raised in opposition. There is substantial money— millions each from race tracks and labor that make up the balance. A significant portion of the money raised by opponents was spent on qualifying the four referenda for the ballot.

Russo moved the number down to $54.5 million after further study. But that's still at least five times of what any other proposition has.

So it's unclear who this helps, but to the extent that people are thinking about the ballot initiatives at the polls, it won't be Props. 92 or 93, it seems.

Is The Term Limit Initiative Destroying This Legislative Session?

I don't think it's any secret that there's been a growing disquiet from progressives with how the California Legislature is doing business. We won't know the final tallies until the end of the session in September, of course, but just in the past couple months, Democratic leaders have given the Governor the ability to build 53,000 new beds for prisons without addressing rehabilitation programs that are the only way to cut costs and reduce recidivism. They approved a shockingly anti-worker set of tribal gaming compacts, with only token protections in the side deals, and then tried to make the dishonest claim that they didn't negotitate the deals in the first place so they can't be blamed for them (um, then don't approve them and force the Governor to start over, you have the power to do that, you know). They combined their healthcare bills to negotiate with the governor without them even including guaranteed issue, meaning that insurance companies can continue to deny coverage to patients for pre-existing conditions (a separate state-run system would be set up to provide for these ill patients, which would make insurers even more loath to spend money on care, given the crutch afforded them by the parallel system for sick people). And they allowed hostile amendments on patient-dumping to pass the Assembly Health Committee. We don't yet have a state budget, as it passed its deadline, and progressives are crossing their fingers that this trend won't continue and some of the worst cuts for the needy preferred by the Governor won't be allowed to remain.

So what is going on here? Why is a Legislature with wide majorities in both houses, sufficient to pass pretty much everything but the budget and tax measures, seemingly caving in on all sides? One article in the SF Chronicle offers a compelling explanation:

Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez's decision this week to end an impasse with Indian gaming tribes and ratify new gambling compacts is designed to help pass a proposed ballot initiative that would allow him and other lawmakers to keep their jobs longer, his critics and political observers said Thursday.

For Núñez, the compacts landed him between the state's two major special interest forces -- wealthy Indian tribes that want to greatly increase the number of slot machines on tribal lands and labor unions that pressed for provisions that would make it easier for workers to organize at casinos.

The standoff between the two groups had placed Núñez in a politically precarious position of having to choose between his political base in labor or mollify tribes that have not been shy about using their deep pockets to buoy or sink political campaigns [...]

"I think what (Núñez) wants to do is to make sure there is no opposition to term limits, not necessarily building support for it," said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a nonprofit research group in Los Angeles. "He may have just removed a major monied interest against the measure."

If this is the motivating interest, then this term limits measure is killing the state, and the ability to make any progress for Californians. And there's even more evidence for this.

Schwarzenegger, however, is not alone in squeezing Núñez, et al. An even more blatant threat came from the Professional Peace Officers Association, an umbrella group for rank-and-file police who bitterly oppose a bill that would allow public access to police disciplinary proceedings.

The measure, Senate Bill 1019 by Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, cleared the Senate but was stalled in the Assembly after John R. Stites, president of the police association, sent messages to legislators that were the bill to be passed, the union would oppose the term limit modification and added ominously, "Ensure that it be understood that this will only be the beginning." Thereafter, the Assembly Public Safety Committee held the bill without a vote -- an action that had to have leadership blessing.

You can read more about how SB 1019 was bottled up in an Assembly Committee.

Obviously, Democratic leaders don't want the Governor against them when the term limits measure comes up for a vote in February, and so the budget and the health-care debate may suffer in the process. But they also appear to be determined to silence any potential interest group that may criticize the measure and fund its opposition. Therefore you see these caves on sunshine for police disciplinary actions and the tribal compacts, and perhaps the homeless dumping bill as well.

This fits with a consistent pattern that is doing nothing but angering Democratic activists. The vast majority of the public isn't paying attention to such matters, due in no small part to the fact that media outlets are abandoning their Sacramento bureaus. But progress in California has completely stalled in this legislative session, perhaps out of a small-minded desire to stay in power for an extra six years. It calls into question why such "leaders" would want to remain in power in the first place. But we can all surmise the answer to that one.

CA Legislature Sells Out On Worker Protection

Democrats in the California State Assembly gave the finger to labor and will allow a massive expansion on Indian gaming in the state:

A group of powerful Southern California Indian tribes have reached a tentative accord with Assembly Democrats that could clear the way for ratification of multibillion-dollar gambling compacts that have been stalled since August.

If pending compacts receive final approval, Sycuan would be among the state's Indian casinos allowed to greatly expand their operations. The five tribes that are involved are among the nation's wealthiest.

The compromises on issues such as casino operating standards and workers' compensation are outlined in a five-page “memorandum of agreement” signed June 21 by Danny Tucker, chairman of the Sycuan band of El Cajon.

That document and a similar one signed by Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro appear to be awaiting the signature of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has been in Europe since Saturday. Schwarzenegger was scheduled to return to the Capitol today.

As juls notes, while the casinos won't be able to rip off the state and their customers due to meaningful oversight into operating standards, employees will still be getting the shaft. At issue is the fact that tribal lands are sovereign, and exempt from US labor laws. Under the compacts, the Legislature could have brought the tribes into compliance on those issues. But they punted:

They have fixed the accounting issues, but failed to ensure that workers rights are protected. The deal does require tribes to help the state ensure that employees do pay alimony and pay for workers comp insurance. These changes are essentially side agreement, and only four out of five tribes have agreed to the accounting provisions. They are on the fast track in the legislature and it all could be passed today.

The Compacts will not protect workers from being threatened or punished if they try and organize. Check cards will not be allowed for union organizing. Both of these were in the 2004 Compacts, but the governor failed to include them in this round and the Democrats declined to insist they be in their for passage. Needless to say, UNITE-HERE is upset.

I figure at least one Assembly Democrat will vote against these: Laura Richardson, who will still be in the Assembly until August, and who had half a million dollars thrown at her by Indian tribes to try and elect her opponent in the CA-37 race Tuesday.

This is really disappointing, but not unexpected. We have a Democratic Legislature that isn't really willing to stand up for worker's rights. This is despite the fact that Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez came out of the labor movement. So now we get these huge casinos (a tax on the poor in their own right) with scant labor protections. That wouldn't fly in Las Vegas and it shouldn't be allowed here.

Payment For Services Rendered

I've heard of independent expenditures before, but never one that was bigger than the campaign's own war chest:

In the last two weeks, a Riverside County Indian tribe has independently spent more than $270,000 on behalf of a Democratic candidate in Tuesday's special election to fill a Long Beach area congressional seat.

The expenditures by the Morongo Band of Mission Indians greatly outweigh other donations in the relatively quiet race to replace Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, who died in April. Since June 14, Morongo has paid for door hangers, newspaper ads, mailers and phone calls to voters on behalf of Jenny Oropeza, a state senator from Long Beach.

The amount spent in the Morongo campaign — by law such expenditures cannot be made in consultation with the candidate — has exceeded the $219,000 Oropeza reported raising in direct donations for the entire campaign as of June 6. It is more than 2 1/2 times the $105,000 that Oropeza's chief competitor, Assemblywoman Laura Richardson (D-Long Beach), reported collecting by the same date.

Oropeza voted for the gaming compacts that would triple the number of slot machines at the Morongo casino, without allowing casino workers full ability to organize and collectively bargain. The compacts would also not offer much in the way of oversight into casino finances, which in a way is the whole point, since the state is supposed to receive 15-25% of the proceeds from the new slot machines, but may not be able to determine what those proceeds are.

But none of this kept Oropeza from breaking a state Senate campaign promise by voting in support of the compacts. And her reward is a quarter of a million dollars in advertising.

Incidentally, Morongo might want to double-check their voter lists.

(her opponent Laura) Richardson said she got two pieces of Morongo-paid mail at her home.

She called the Morongo expenditures "off the charts" but predicted that voters "are going to see through exactly what's going on."

Maybe, maybe not. And my sense is that voters aren't all that interested in the mass of mailers and robocalls, especially in the middle of June in a special election that will likely not garner 15% turnout. Still, it's interesting to see the lengths to which Morongo will go to pay back their supporters. If they really wanted to help Oropeza, however, they would spend money for GOTV machinery instead of ads and calls, to counter the network of labor groups that will be helping Richardson turn out her voters, mainly because of the very Morongo compacts Oropeza signed.