Term limits initiative sparks array of opinions

Who should be the next U.S. president isn't the only thing local voters will decide on Feb. 5. There are seven propositions on the ballot, one of which -- Prop. 93 -- aims to change the way term limits operate in Sacramento. First, a refresher.

Californians approved, by a narrow margin, a measure in 1990 that limits lawmakers to six years in the Assembly and eight years in the Senate, for a combined maximum of 14 years in the legislature.

Assembly members are up for election every two years, senators every four.

Proposition 93 shortens the total years to 12, but enables legislators to spend all of them in one house.

It includes a grandfather clause that allows current legislators to stay in the house they are in, up to a maximum of 12 years.

All in all, it's one of the easiest propositions to read and understand.

Here's how the arguments shake out.

Many opponents of Prop. 93 paint it as a ploy on the part of incumbent legislators to stay in power.

They often mention that Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, who will be out of their current offices if Prop. 93 fails, are among its biggest supporters.

"I think the way it's worded, I think it's extremely deceptive," said Danny Gilmore, a Republican who was narrowly defeated by two-term incumbent Assemblywoman Nicole Parra, D-Hanford, in 2006.

Gilmore said the proposition "would have been more palatable to the voters" if it didn't include the grandfather clause for incumbents.

Opponents of Prop. 93 tend to be strong supporters of the idea of term limits.

"You should get fresh ideas in there," Gilmore said.

Supporters of Prop. 93 aren't necessarily against the idea of term limits, but they argue that the current system forces legislators out of the Senate or the Assembly just as they are beginning to develop expertise.

"I truly believe it will help to make state government more efficient and accountable to the people," said Parra, who will have to leave the Assembly this year under current law.

Parra said she hasn't decided yet, but is leaning toward not running again if Prop. 93 passes.

Parra, who has chaired three Assembly committees, insisted that current term limit rules produce less knowledgeable committee chairs.

More or less the same argument is being made by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in TV ads supporting the measure.

Parra argued that dislike for incumbents isn't a good enough reason to oppose Prop. 93.

"OK, but you're just going to have the same inefficiencies and less accountability," Parra said.

Some opponents of Prop. 93 believe that it will do nothing to create greater accountability because it isn't tied to redistricting.

The last time Senate and Assembly districts were carved out, the lines were drawn by the Democrats -- then the party in power -- to ensure a Democratic advantage.

The result, according to David Provost, a professor emeritus at California State University Fresno, is a 100 percent election rate for incumbents "since 2002."

Provost said he would consider approving Prop. 93 if it was tied to redistricting, but without it, he doesn't think it has much merit.

Supporters of Prop. 93 disagree.

Mark Trezza, a Hanford Democrat who works as a political science instructor at Fresno City College, called it "a move in the right direction."

After six years of experience in the Assembly, he said, referring to those like Nicole Parra who have reached the limit, "You're a lot better at it. You probably are."

But Trezza said his "gut" tells him that Prop. 93 won't pass.

He thinks that voters won't want to tinker with a system that has gone unchallenged since 1990.

"It's going to be interesting to see," he said.

The reporter can be reached at 583-2432

(Jan. 31, 2008)