Lockyer Describes Ballot Initiatives With Summary Justice

Nobody except Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has had a bigger impact on the current initiative wars than Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer.

He has scared off a proposed public pension overhaul. He has titled a spending cap proposal with words that strategically help opponents, led by teachers unions.

Now he is asking a court to remove from the ballot a political redistricting measure.

The Democrat is widely accused by conservatives of playing politics.

Lockyer emphatically denies it. “Just doing my job,” he insists.

None of this should come as a surprise to people who have followed Lockyer’s 32-year career in elective office, 25 of it in the Legislature. The Alameda County pol is never far from controversy.

Back in the ‘80s, there was some bizarre behavior and temper fits. He reformed and served four effective years as state Senate leader in the ‘90s, at the center of every policy fight.

As attorney general, he surprised people by announcing after the Gray Davis recall that he had voted for Schwarzenegger (and against the recall). Lockyer said he liked Schwarzenegger’s message of “hope [and] upbeat problem-solving.”

But Schwarzenegger quickly tired of his new pal when the AG publicly urged him to submit to an investigation of alleged sexual misconduct.

Lockyer began gearing for a gubernatorial race in 2006 and was the Democratic front-runner. But in April he stunned everybody by withdrawing, saying he didn’t want to spend the next 10 years “in partisan hand-to-hand combat.”

Now 64, Lockyer has lowered his sights to a race for state treasurer.

But Schwarzenegger is looking beatable, I noted.

“I’m kind of a contrarian,” Lockyer replied. “I think he’s in trouble, but I don’t think that’s the final word.... If he doesn’t change his substance and style, he’s still in trouble.”

What would he advise?

“Settle those matters on the November ballot. We don’t need to have a special election. All those issues could be and should be resolved with legislators.

“Second thing, don’t act like a bully.”

Lockyer seldom minces words or pulls punches. Lately, he has been in “hand-to-hand combat” with initiative sponsors.

His power over the ballot comes from the attorney general’s duty to write a title and 100-word summary for each proposed initiative. The title and summary then are attached to the initiative petition as it is circulated for voter signatures, and later printed on the ballot itself.

“We write titles that describe the initiative -- not just repeat the [sponsor’s] propaganda,” Lockyer says.

In February, Lockyer wrote a devastating summary for a Schwarzenegger-endorsed initiative that would have eliminated traditional pension benefits for new state and local government workers and replaced them with 401(k)s.

High up in the summary was this sentence: “Eliminates death, disability benefits for such employees.” Initiative sponsors heatedly denied it. But Lockyer insists it’s true.

Faced with angry opposition from police and firefighters, Schwarzenegger abandoned the initiative and postponed further attempts at pension “reform” until next year.

The governor’s top priority in his “reform agenda” is Proposition 76, which he calls the “Live within our means act.” Not Lockyer. He titles it merely: “School funding. State Spending.” And the summary’s first sentence begins: “Changes state minimum school funding requirements (Proposition 98)....”

That hoists a red flag for millions of voters, whose top priority for the tax dollar is school funding. It gives the education lobby potent ammunition to attack the governor for trying to loosen school spending guarantees. Which he is.

Prop. 76 also does other things: imposes a spending cap and transfers more budgeting power to the governor. Lead coauthor Bill Hauck, president of the California Business Roundtable, complains that Lockyer’s summary overemphasizes school funding. He also contends it includes some factual errors. The AG’s office is expected to make some corrections -- but not change the emphasis.

Actually, Lockyer reports, he doesn’t personally write the titles or summaries. They’re written by teams of lawyers. “In my nearly seven years as AG, I’ve probably had 600 to 700 of these,” he says, “and I have yet to change a single word when they come out of the professional staff.”

Then there must be some telepathy going on -- some lawyers who can read their boss’ mind and politics. Just a hunch.

Now there’s the Lockyer-instigated court fight over Proposition 77, which would strip the Legislature of its power to redistrict legislative and congressional seats and give it to a panel of retired judges.

As a legislator, Lockyer tried four times to take away the Legislature’s redistricting power and shift it to an independent panel.

“I’ve always felt there was an inherent conflict of interest with members of the Legislature drawing their own districts,” he says. “And that conflict undermines the public’s confidence in their government.”

But he calls Prop. 77 “kooky.”

Regardless, he adds, he’d still try to throw it off the ballot because sponsors didn’t play by the rules. They submitted a different version of the initiative to him for title and summary than they circulated to voters for signatures.

Sponsors contend it was all a mistake and the differences are trivial.

Lockyer counters that such sloppy rule-breaking “cannot be condoned” because it “would open the door to ‘bait and switch’ tactics.”

That’s how he’s supposed to react. It’s why we have an attorney general. To enforce the law. Blow the whistle. Not just wink at rule-breakers or close his eyes. Call up a judge and let her decide.

George Skelton writes Monday and Thursday. Reach him at george.skelton@latimes.com.