Republicans’ Anti-Molester Measure Puts Democrats in a Tough Spot

Every few years, outnumbered Republicans back Democrats against the legislative wall. And if the Democrats don’t surrender, they get smashed.

One prime example: 12 years ago, Republicans were pushing the “three strikes and you’re out” sentencing measure, both as a ballot initiative and a separate bill. Democrats resisted for a while. Then wily Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco) advised them: “Better get the hell out of the way.”

Most did. A couple who didn’t lost reelection bids.

The measure, fueled by public anger over violent crime -- the Polly Klaas murder, the L.A. riots -- barreled through the Legislature and the electorate. It was embraced by 72% of the voters.

The GOP benefited because the ballot proposition helped draw to the polls right-leaning “occasional voters” who might otherwise have stayed home. One particular beneficiary was the bill’s author, Fresno Assemblyman Bill Jones, who narrowly was elected secretary of state.

That same election, Republicans and Gov. Pete Wilson lined up solidly behind the anti-illegal immigration initiative, Proposition 187. The Democrat-controlled Legislature had refused to address the public’s growing frustration with illegal immigrants. Democratic politicians then fought the initiative, which sought to eliminate the illegals’ taxpayer-funded services.

Prop. 187 won with 59% of the vote. It was one reason Californians briefly turned the Assembly over to Republicans.

A few years later, Democrats championed driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants. Republicans squawked. Voters lined up with the GOP. It was another motivation for them to yank Gov. Gray Davis from office.

Despite California’s blue state complexion, it has always produced a play-by-the-rules, tough-on-crime electorate. This is still the West, and that doesn’t mean West Hollywood. We’re tolerant of free spirits and relatively harmless social behavior -- go ahead, smoke that medicinal marijuana -- but we have no sympathy for lawbreakers, especially murderers and molesters.

It took decades, capped by the ousting of three state Supreme Court justices, to finally convince Democratic politicians that it was hazardous to oppose the death penalty.

Now another anti-crime brawl is roaring that has all the signs of a potential win-win outcome for Republicans. For Democrats, it’s looking perilously like they have two options: capitulate or risk condemnation.

The core issue is child molestation. And although it would be blatantly unfair to characterize Democrats as protecting the molesters (while Republicans are fighting for children), that’s precisely the danger they face.

“It’s hard for Democrats to hurt themselves in California, but crime is one issue where they can,” says Republican consultant Dave Gilliard, who is organizing signature-collecting for an initiative billed as “the toughest sex-offender law in the nation.”

Called Jessica’s Law, it’s named after a 9-year-old Florida girl who was kidnapped, raped and killed by a convicted sex offender last year.

Says GOP consultant Ray McNally, who managed a 2004 ballot defense of “three-strikes” penalties: “Pity the poor politician who decides to stand up against this initiative. They’ll be roadkill by morning.”

Basically, the measure would require that child molesters -- if the victim is under 14 -- be imprisoned for at least 15 years. Penalties would be increased across the board for sex crimes, including luring minors through the Internet. If released from prison, sex offenders would have to wear global positioning system trackers for life. And they couldn’t live within 2,000 feet of a school or park.

The cost? Unknown, but a lot, according to nonpartisan Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill. Eventually in the hundreds of millions. Each year.

The measure’s sponsor is a husband-wife legislative team from Lancaster: Assemblywoman Sharon Runner and Sen. George Runner.

Both say they were motivated by the Democrats’ refusal to pass tough anti-crime bills, especially protecting children. “After years of frustration,” says George Runner, “Sharon and I decided to go directly to the people.”

Republicans long have grumbled about both houses’ liberal public safety committees. But moderate Democrats also have griped privately.

“They’re way far to the left of many of us,” says one top aide to a Democratic lawmaker. “I’m fascinated why it hasn’t changed and how stupid they can be during an election year, of all times.”

The chairman of the Assembly Public Safety Committee is San Francisco Democrat Mark Leno. His committee kills “a lot of just bad bills” that are too costly, he says.

“The percentage of our general fund spending on corrections is out of control. Growing, growing, growing. After all, we’re dealing with a Legislature that refuses ever, ever to raise a tax.”

Leno is pushing an alternative anti-molester bill that targets the most dangerous child predators by increasing penalties, providing more treatment, requiring GPS tracking and barring sex offenders from school grounds. It’s much less expensive than Jessica’s Law.

His bill cleared the Assembly last week, 49-0, after a long, fiery debate, and was sent to the Senate. Every Democrat supported it. Practically every Republican abstained, holding out for Jessica’s Law.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has endorsed the GOP measure. He also has left open the possibility of signing a compromise.

But a bipartisan agreement isn’t likely. The Runners’ initiative is close to qualifying for the November ballot. Leno’s bill may be practical and affordable, but Republicans feel they’ve been ignored too long. They sense one of those rare routs.

The Democrats’ best move might be to just give Republicans their bill, but amend it with a tax increase to pay for the cost. Make Republicans choose between protecting children or wealthy taxpayers.

George Skelton writes Monday and Thursday. Reach him at george.skeltonlatimes.com.