A Term Limit-Remap Trade-Off?

Some key lawmakers suggested Tuesday that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger might be able to win support for a plan that changes the way California draws its legislative districts by helping them get rid of the state’s strict term limits.

Schwarzenegger is expected to announce in his State of the State speech today that he will call a special legislative session, in part to consider stripping lawmakers of the power to carve their own districts and give it instead to a panel of retired judges. Districts are now drawn to protect incumbents, Schwarzenegger has said, depriving Californians of truly competitive races and contributing to the Legislature’s dysfunction.

Not a single legislative incumbent was defeated in November.

Lawmakers from both parties have been hostile to the governor’s idea. But in the run-up to his speech, lobbyists and lawmakers have been informally discussing the basis of a potential deal.

If the governor would back an initiative easing term limits, and make that goal part of his 2005 “reform” package, a new redistricting method might be more palatable to the Legislature, some officials said.

“It’s a natural,” said state Sen. Dick Ackerman (R-Irvine), who leads the Senate’s Republicans.

Rolling back term limits “could help some people who may be unsure of how the redistricting is going to turn out. If they see there’s a trade-off, that might engender some support,” Ackerman said.

One of the possibilities being discussed in the capital would raise the total number of years lawmakers could serve from 14 to a maximum of 24.

No formal proposal has been made. Margita Thompson, a spokeswoman for Schwarzenegger, said Tuesday that the governor had not yet released a redistricting plan, much less begun to negotiate over it.

Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (D-Los Angeles) said he had been approached by “influential people” -- whom he would not identify -- about coupling a redistricting plan with a loosening of term limits. Nunez said he did not think the issues of term limits and redistricting should be linked, but he said he believed terms should be extended.

“I don’t think legislators get enough time to serve their constituents in the best way possible by having such short terms in the Assembly,” he said. “We’re only here six years.”

Presently, lawmakers can serve a total of 14 years -- eight in the Senate and six in the Assembly. Polls show that Californians overwhelmingly support the restrictions, put in place by a voter-approved initiative in 1990. A Field Poll in October showed that 75% favored legislative term limits, with 20% opposed.

In the past, Schwarzenegger has said he would not want to see term limits abolished. As a candidate in the 2003 recall election, he denounced “career politicians” who become “disconnected from the people they are supposed to represent.”

But in the last year, he has shown a willingness to reverse course. He dropped a plan to cut millions of dollars from programs to help the developmentally disabled and reversed a decision that would have allowed animal shelters to euthanize strays after 72 hours.

Some political analysts say terms limits are a failure. Lawmakers are sent home before they become steeped in complex issues involving energy, water, the budget and the environment.

Term limits, Ackerman said, are producing “turnover in people but not the quality of legislative work that [voters] expect.”

Some people close to the governor would like to see term limits eased. George Kieffer is a friend of Schwarzenegger and past chairman of the L.A. Area Chamber of Commerce board, which in November called for both the abolition of term limits and a new method of drawing district lines.

Kieffer, who served on Schwarzenegger’s transition team after the recall, said that if voters were assured that district boundaries were fairly drawn, they might be willing to extend the terms of elected officials.

“Term limits have failed and have wreaked havoc with institutional knowledge and experience,” Kieffer said. “There was so much protection for incumbency built into the last redistricting by both parties that people will not support a change in term limits until they gain confidence in redistricting.”

Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland) told reporters Tuesday that redrawing political boundaries was unnecessary and would distract lawmakers from more important subjects, such as education and healthcare.

That both Republican and Democratic lawmakers are pleased with current district lines proves that drastic overhaul is not needed, Perata said.

“With regard to redistricting, it’s really an intramural game,” Perata said. “I know people don’t get up in the morning in my district, make coffee and then decide [they are] worried about redistricting. What I’d like to do is see us concentrate on the issues Californians sent us to Sacramento to solve.”

Times staff writer Jordan Rau contributed to this report.