Failing to draw the line

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH TALKING, so there was nothing inherently wrong with state legislators rushing last week to form a committee to discuss changing California’s term limits and redistricting laws. With time running out to add one or two more measures to the already crowded Nov. 7 ballot, a handful of lawmakers met over the weekend to hear from experts about how to proceed, and the experts were nearly unanimous: Move forward with fixing redistricting, but hold off on relaxing term limits.

That’s a good idea. Redistricting in its current form is the ultimate backroom deal, in which elected officials shape their own districts and in fact choose their own voters in order to best serve themselves and their advancement opportunities. Nothing could go further to restore Californians’ faith in their government than an agreement by members of the Legislature to give up their line-drawing power. They must win back some trust before asking voters to relax term limits.

Besides, Senate Constitutional Amendment 3, on redistricting reform, has been through two years of hearings and analysis. The proposed amendment, sponsored by state Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), would probably have stood a better chance with voters than last year’s Proposition 77, which voters rejected in part because it was one of four ballot items that made up Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s “reform agenda,” which matched the governor’s own unpopularity. Lowenthal’s measure has bipartisan support outside the Capitol.

It’s not that term-limits reform isn’t needed. Short-term lawmakers lack the perspective and independence to stand up to lobbyists and campaign donors from business, labor and the host of special interests that dominate state politics. A proposal has been floating around Sacramento backrooms for months; it would allow a lawmaker to serve a total of 12 years in the Capitol, in either or both houses, instead of the current maximum six years in the Assembly and eight in the Senate.

But the term-limits reform had yet to solidify into a bill, and the middle of August was too late to start the process. Legislative leaders admitted as much on Tuesday. They went too far, however, when they also claimed that it was too late to do anything about redistricting reform, which has been working through the process since late 2004.

Now the Legislature, if it does not move forward with Lowenthal’s measure, may have missed its chance. Initiative drafters may well trump the debate with a partisan ballot measure. Voters, meanwhile, are unlikely to have much taste for relaxing term limits to benefit next year’s new, freshman-dominated Legislature. That Legislature, after all, will not even have had the chance to succeed at a task at which the current body failed: earning back a measure of the public’s trust.