Gay Marriage Ban, Gaming Measure OKd

Californians on Tuesday approved an emotion-packed initiative banning recognition of gay marriages, a major expansion of casino gambling on Indian reservations and tough sanctions against juveniles who commit violent crimes.

An initiative to limit campaign donations was rejected, and the vote remained close on a measure to make it easier for school districts to finance school construction.

The insurance industry won a high-priced fight with trial lawyers to repeal legislation signed into law last year by Gov. Gray Davis permitting more lawsuits against insurance companies. Voters also reaffirmed their support of a 50-cent-per-pack tax on cigarettes to fund a variety of child education and health programs.

Bond measures funding parks, water projects, library construction and veterans homes also had large leads.

‘Altogether, voters decided on 20 measures, including five bond measures and five other propositions placed on the ballot by the Legislature. Moneyed interests, wealthy individuals and ambitious politicians paid professional petition circulators anywhere from 50 cents to $4 per signature to qualify the 10 other measures.

The price tag for direct democracy was more than $150 million. Well-heeled campaigns spent more than $1 million a week to sway voters. The $150 million--a figure totaled by the California Voter Foundation--falls short of the record sums spent in November 1998. But as a group, the March 2000 initiatives will be among the most expensive.

“The TV stations were the big winners. It’s just getting more and more expensive,” said Bob Stern, a campaign finance expert and president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a nonprofit organization in Los Angeles.

The ballot’s most costly campaign was the one between two of the wealthiest interests involved in politics: the insurance industry and trial lawyers.

Insurers spent more than $50 million to defeat Propositions 30 and 31, two measures they had placed on the ballot. Both propositions mirrored state laws backed by trial lawyers to give injured automobile accident victims the right to sue the at-fault driver’s insurance company when it failed to offer a satisfactory settlement.

Unable to kill the proposals when they were under consideration in the Legislature last year, insurers put them on the ballot and asked the voters to do it instead.

Third-party liability has been a burning issue in the state Capitol for decades. Insurance companies contended that by allowing such lawsuits, motorists could end up paying 15% more for car insurance.

“We think the pocketbook resonated most powerfully with the voters,” said Dan Dunmoyer, president of the Personal Insurance Federation of California and one of the chief insurance strategists. “The message of paying more for auto insurance was a message that the voters believed.”

The lawyers had sought to fight back with ads depicting insurers as wolves attempting to overturn California law. But their $6.5-million campaign allowed them only limited air time.

As much as the insurance companies spent, the cost of the fight fell short of the record for a single initiative set in 1998, when casino-owning Indian tribes squared off against out-of-state gambling corporations. The Proposition 5 campaign to legalize and expand gambling on tribal land cost almost $90 million.

Proposition 5 won by a landslide but was struck down by the California Supreme Court. The high court ruling prompted the tribes and Gov. Davis to enter into negotiations last fall that led to Proposition 1A.

Just as they did in 1998, California’s Indian tribes won big, garnering a lopsided victory for Proposition 1A to legalize casinos and Nevada-style slot machines on tribal land.

“Californians . . . have shown their understanding and willingness to stand behind the notion that tribes for too long haven’t had a fair hand dealt to them,” said Richard Milanovich, chairman of the Agua Caliente tribe, which operates a casino in downtown Palm Springs and plans a significant expansion.

This time, Indian tribes raised $23.6 million, although they faced limited organized opposition. Davis and almost the entire Legislature supported the measure, andseveral Nevada-based casino corporations have struck deals to help tribes manage, operate and market tribal casinos.

Proposition 1A grants tribes exclusive constitutional authority to operate casinos in California.

As part of an agreement between Davis and the tribes, the governor says Indians would have the right to operate 45,000 slot machines--up from the almost 19,000 quasi-slot machines they have now. Critics have countered that the agreement could permit as many as 113,000 slot machines--more than any state other than Nevada.

Former Lt. Gov. Leo McCarthy, one of the few public figures opposed to expanding gambling on tribal land, contended that the additional slot machines will lead to a doubling of gambling addicts in California.

Perhaps the most controversial measure on the state ballot was Proposition 22, which sparked a $16-million campaign that divided neighborhoods, families and church congregations. It was winning by a wide margin.

Sponsored by a conservative Republican state senator from Palmdale, the measure bars California from recognizing same-sex marriages if they are ever legalized in another state. Opponents, including President Clinton and Davis, called it a divisive measure that could lead to an erosion of legal protections for gays and lesbians. Backers say it simply reaffirmed traditional family values.

Also drawing emotional responsewas Proposition 21, the victorious measure pushed by former Gov. Pete Wilson to permit prosecutors to try juveniles as young as 14 as adults if they are charged with murder and certain sex crimes. A major overhaul of the criminal justice system, Proposition 21 makes juvenile proceedings less secret, and could result in prison sentences of life without parole for teenage felons who commit murders. Civil libertarians called the measure draconian; backers called it necessary to attack increased violence by young teenagers.

Voters rejected Proposition 25, a measure to cap campaign contributions. Sponsored by Ron Unz, a wealthy Silicon Valley initiative promoter and failed Republican gubernatorial candidate, Proposition 25 called for banning corporate contributions, establishing campaign spending limits and expanding public disclosure of donations of more than $1,000. The measure also sought to provide for modest public financing of state campaigns.

Virtually every major interest in Sacramento opposed the measure, and it faced an onslaught of five- and six-figure donations from the California Democratic Party, business groups and organized labor. The California Republican Party opposed it too, though the GOP has less money than the Democrats, and did not contribute notable sums to oppose it.

“The truth is,” Unz said Tuesday night, “that when you’re up against big corporations, big unions, both political parties and most of the elected officials in the state, it’s pretty tough to win.”

In one of the more far-reaching measures, voters were considering Proposition 26, to lower the two-thirds vote requirement for school bond issues to a simple majority.

The measure did not contain an immediate financing component. But it would make passage of local school bonds easier. Since the bonds are repaid by property taxes, property owners probably would see incremental increases in their tax bills in years to come.

The well-financed campaign for Proposition 26--more than $23 million--flooded the airwaves with ads that emphasized smaller class size and greater accountability, despite the fact that neither was guaranteed by the initiative’s passage.

The California Teachers Assn., the main union representing public school instructors, gave at least $7 million to the effort. The measure also received major support from the Silicon Valley.

Opponents, principally the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., raised just over $1 million to support their equally exaggerated claims that the proliferation of bonds sparked by the initiative would double property taxes.

Of the five bond measures on the ballot, Proposition 12 called for the most spending--$2.1 billion to buy and improve state and local parks. Proposition 13 was a $1.97-billion package for water and flood control projects. Both were winning.

Among the other measures, voters:

* Rejected Proposition 28, an effort by Ned Roscoe, owner of Cigarettes Cheaper! discount tobacco stores, to repeal a 50-cent-per-pack tax on cigarettes imposed by a 1998 initiative. Championed by film director Rob Reiner and various health groups, the tax pays for a variety of early childhood education and health programs.

* Turned down Proposition 23, allowing voters to cast ballots for “none of the above” in all federal and state elections.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Proposition 22

* How much do you personally identify with the gay or lesbian community?

*--*

A lot Some Not at all Voted YES on Prop. 22 9% 38% 70% Voted NO on Prop. 22 91% 62% 30%

*--*

*

Source: L.A. Times exit poll Tuesday.

*

Times Poll results are also available at https://www.latimes.com/timespoll