Joe Matthews praises Assemblyman Gatto's initiative reform efforts

The California Constitution has been amended over 500 times.

Joe Matthews is a Journalist and California Editor at Zócalo Public Square, Fellow at the Center for Social Cohesion at Arizona State University, and co-author of California Crackup: How Reform Broke the Golden State and How We Can Fix It (UC Press, 2010).

As one of the leading voices on how to fix California's broken  government structures, I am proud to receive recognition from him for my efforts at initiative reform.  Below is  short excerpt of an article he wrote last week at Fox and Hounds Daily.

Many California leaders and groups want to make this the year for reforming the initiative process. You’d think I’d be one of them. I've written two books that dealt in detail with the initiative process. I help run a global forum on direct democracy. I teach a class on the subject. I write about it constantly... 

...But I think “initiative reform,” as a concept, is something we shouldn't do. 

That doesn't mean there aren't good ideas out there. There are. 

Darrell Steinberg’s package of proposals makes a ton of sense. 

Assemblyman Mike Gatto has been advancing the smartest, most ambitious proposals on initiatives in recent years. 

The Think Long Committee for California has a very well-thought-out batch of proposals, with the hands-down best new idea on the subject (creating a group that could do long-term thinking and put measures directly on the ballot as an alternative to signatures)...

...So what’s the problem? Put simply: the initiative process can’t be reformed by itself....

You can read Joe Matthews' entire article by clicking HERE.


Mike Gatto is the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee of the California State Assembly.  He represents the cities of Burbank, Glendale, La Canada-Flintridge, La Crescenta, Montrose, the Los Angeles neighborhoods of Los Feliz, Silver Lake, Atwater Village, and portions of the Hollywood Hills and East Hollywood.   www.asm.ca.gov/gatto

The martial art of subduing special interests

By Assemblyman Mike Gatto

Passing a major reform in Sacramento has the same odds as a novice knocking out the champ at a martial-arts competition. This is particularly true when it comes to reforming ballot-box budgeting. I’ve introduced eight measures on this topic over the past 2 1/2 years, and people often ask me why I bother. Changes to the status quo are long shots that require heavy lifting. Complex constitutional amendments are not easily explained in sound bites. And many of these bills don’t exactly ingratiate a legislator with special interests. I always respond that I am lucky enough to have been made to see the big picture, and that the big picture imparts in me a sense of martial duty.

When I first ran for state Assembly, I sought the endorsement of former Speaker Robert Hertzberg, whose encyclopedic knowledge of our government and involvement in various reform groups made him a prime candidate to teach this karate kid a thing or two. In true Mr. Miyagi fashion, he wanted some wax-on, wax-off. “You can’t have my endorsement until I know you’re prepared for the monumental task before you. And you cannot be prepared until you’ve studied the roots of California’s problems.”

Undaunted, I humbly left his office and began my quest. I read everything I could, whether he’d suggested it or not: California histories, Legislative Analyst Office reports, think-tank studies and more. After months of study, I was ready to spar. At our next meeting, I was able to thoroughly discuss the big picture with Hertzberg. The good news? I received his endorsement and won my race. The bad news? I’ve remained acutely aware of the need for reform, and troubled by the general inaction to achieve it.

Buried in the documents I studied were disturbing facts about the scope and harmful effects of ballot-box budgeting. Unfunded program spending from ballot initiatives costs California at least $8.6 billion each year, and special funds created by ballot initiatives soak up an additional $2 billion taxpayer dollars each year. This is nuts.

I believe those funds should be spent on the core functions of government: Paving roads, improving our education system, keeping courts open so lawsuits don’t drag on for years, and making sure someone promptly responds when you dial 9-1-1.  Ballot-box budgeting for special interests’ pet projects siphons resources away from these core functions.  And when government cannot perform its core functions adequately, people lose faith.  That is why I have tried mightily to reform our system.

In 2011, I introduced ACA 6, a simple measure that said an initiative could not create a new program without first identifying how it would pay for it.  Special interests shouldn’t be allowed to enshrine a new spending program without telling the voters exactly how they will find the money to fund it.  I introduced AB 65, which would print the top five financial supporters of an initiative in our ballot pamphlets.  Following the money is the easiest way to know who will benefit from a measure.  And I introduced ACA 10, which would make it harder to add junk to our constitution but ensure that reformers can still remove junk.  The federal constitution has been amended just 27 times in 225 years.  California’s has been amended 521 times in less than half that period, a major cause of the state’s dysfunction.

I am heartened to see so many newcomers echoing the calls for reform, now that Democrats have a two-thirds majority in the legislature.  Although my proposals and others are far from partisan, I, too, hope that party unity gives reformers a better chance of winning hearts and votes, even if the clear need for reform previously did not.  I also believe that Republican leaders would be wise to join reform efforts, instead of blocking them because the author happens to be a Democrat.  After all, fiscal responsibility used to be what Republicans campaigned on, and protecting our state constitution from special interests should appeal to all patriots.

Will this year be the one where the karate kids finally defeat the special-interest champs?  I will continue pushing for these important reforms this session.  If you think reforming ballot-box budgeting is important, I encourage you to write your state representatives and tell them to do something about it.  

# # #

This opinion-editorial first appeared in the Glendale News-Press on December 22, 2012 - You can read this OpEd and more at the Glendale News-Press by clicking  HERE

Mike Gatto is the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee of the California State Assembly.  He represents the cities of Burbank, Glendale, La Canada-Flintridge, La Crescenta, Montrose, the Los Angeles neighborhoods of Los Feliz, Silver Lake, Atwater Village, and portions of the Hollywood Hills and East Hollywood.   www.asm.ca.gov/gatto  

California Democrats begin rein with supermajority

By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press

Updated 9:11 p.m., Monday, December 3, 2012

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Democratic legislative leaders began laying out an ambitious agenda for their nearly unprecedented power as California's new Legislature was sworn into office on Monday, promising caution on new taxes but willingness to bypass Republicans as they seek to borrow billions of dollars and ask voters to make sweeping changes to the state Constitution.

"The voters do not want us to burst out of the gate to raise more taxes," said Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, who was re-elected by senators to that leadership post Monday.

But he added that "there is an equally compelling danger. It is the danger in being so cautious, so worried about creating controversy that we fail to take advantage of unprecedented opportunities. Power is, by definition, fleeting. Misuse it and you'll lose it. Fail to use it, and it withers away," he said.

Democrats won two-thirds majorities in the Assembly and Senate in last month's election for the first time in 130 years and will be working with a governor of the same political party. The supermajorities will allow them to raise taxes if they choose and to unilaterally put constitutional amendments before voters.

In quick succession, Steinberg backed proposals by two Senate Democrats to introduce constitutional amendments that would lower the vote threshold to raise taxes for school districts and some other local governments from the current two-thirds to 55 percent. The proposals by Mark Leno of San Francisco and Lois Wolk of Davis would tinker with Proposition 13, the landmark 1978 property tax initiative that increased the number of votes needed to pass tax increases.

Steinberg said Democrats are now free to rewrite an $11 billion water bond set to go before voters in 2014, rearranging its priorities and lowering the borrowing by at least $1 billion. Republicans had insisted on including the possibility of building new dams when the bipartisan package was approved by lawmakers in 2009, while Democrats generally favored alternatives such as cleaning up contaminated groundwater and increasing conservation efforts.

Steinberg and Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles, who was also re-elected to that post Monday, said the new legislative session marks a turning point as the state recovers from the housing and economic collapse of 2008.

The state's independent legislative analyst has said the state could even see a budget surplus next year, and lawmakers will have an additional $6 billion a year after voters approved Gov. Jerry Brown's November initiative raising the state sales tax and income taxes on the wealthy.

Perez said it is time to restore California as a land of opportunity.

"And for the middle class Californians who have weathered a very difficult period in our history, we must deliver," he said. "The next generation of Californians will have their future determined, in no small part, by the actions we take over the next few years."

Perez signaled his willingness to work with Republicans, which Assemblyman Eric Linder, a newly elected Republican from Corona, applauded.

"This might provide a lot of opportunity for us," Linder said. "We can stay united. We can actually look for really good solutions to the problem and we have our place. I think it's an important one."

Sen. Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, who will remain as minority leader, noted that the tax increases voters approved with Proposition 30 are temporary, and the state could set itself up for future problems if Democrats spend the money too quickly.

"We will be setting the stage for our own fiscal cliff," Huff said. "... Now is not the time to go on a spending spree."

Steinberg proposed splitting new revenue in roughly equal portions to retire debt, build a rainy day fund and restore cuts to social and education programs.

And he said Democrats should ask voters in 2014 to consider changing an initiative process that critics say has been hijacked by wealthy individuals or special interests.

Monday's events were mostly ceremonial before the Legislature adjourned for the holidays.

Nearly half the 80 Assembly members are new to the Legislature. In the three races that officials consider too close to be called, the current front-runners were sworn in, including in Assembly District 36, which spans parts of Kern, Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties. Democrat Steve Fox was sworn in Monday, but Republican Ron Smith has said he will seek a recount.

Perez said the oath of office would be rescinded if the results were overturned by the final vote tally.

For the first time, new lawmakers will be able to serve 12 years in either the Assembly or the Senate, or a combination of both. Voters approved that change from previous term limits, which limited legislators to eight years in the Senate and six in the Assembly.

Lawmakers, along with California's statewide officeholders, also are working for less pay starting Monday. The California Citizens Compensation Commission voted in May to reduce their salaries by 5 percent.

Even with the reduction, California lawmakers remain the nation's highest paid with a base salary of $90,525 a year. Unlike lawmakers in some other states, they do not receive pensions.

The salaries for the Assembly and Senate leaders will be cut to $104,105.

"I think it kind of is punitive, but we have to do a better job of showing that we have the state's interests at heart and not our own interests, and when we do that I think they (commissioners) will respond accordingly," Huff said in response to the pay cut.

The governor's $174,000 salary will drop to about $165,000. Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom's $130,000 salary will fall to about $124,000, and Attorney General Kamala Harris will be paid less than $144,000, down from about $151,000.

Commissioners justified the action by pointing to years of state budget deficits. The independent panel previously reduced salaries for California's statewide officeholders and its 120 legislators by 18 percent in 2009.

___

Associated Press writer Judy Lin contributed to this story.

Read more: http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/California-Democrats-begin-rein-with-supermajority-4086059.php

Mike Gatto is the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee of the California State Assembly.  He represents the cities of Burbank, Glendale, La Canada-Flintridge, La Crescenta, Montrose, the Los Angeles neighborhoods of Los Feliz, Silver Lake, Atwater Village, and portions of the Hollywood Hills and East Hollywood.   www.asm.ca.gov/gatto 

#  #  #

Even a Tiny Initiative Reform Can't Make It Past the Governor

By Joe Mathews |  Friday, Oct 5, 2012  |  Updated 9:13 AM PDT

Initiative reform is an unpopular cause, and an uphill battle.

Assemblyman Mike Gatto, a Burbank Democrat, has been one of the few lawmakers foolhardy enough to attempt it. And this session he appeared to have achieved some success with AB 2220.

This was modest with a capital "M." But useful. The legislation tried to grab the attention of voters by letting them know something very important about their votes on initiatives: that when they do something by initiative, it can't be changed. This permanence -- you could call it inflexibility -- distinguishes California's initiative process from how the initiative is used around the country and the world.

Gatto specifically would have instructed the non-partisan legislative analyst to add one paragraph to the ballot pamphlet warning that the measure would provide an increase in revenues to fund new or existing programs, create a new fund, or create or change a funding formula for programs. In essence, this is a warning label that fiscal decisions are being made that will be hard to undo. An example of one of the possible warnings:

"Unless changed by a future voter-approved ballot measure, this initiative would permanently dedicate state funding to the program(s) identified, and these funds would not be available to meet other responsibilities of the state."

This legislation made it through the legislature. But it couldn't make it through Gov. Jerry Brown, who has been a political reform skeptic and has seen the initiative process as a means to the end. He vetoed it.

His explanation? He wrote in a veto message that, while he shared Gatto's concern that voters should understand what their vote on an initiative means, he wasn't sure if additional warning was all that helpful, since the legislative analysis already provides information in the ballot pamphlet.

Let's hope Gatto tries again.

Lead Prop Zero blogger Joe Mathews is California editor at Zocalo Public Square, a fellow at Arizona State University’s Center for Social Cohesion, and co-author of California Crackup: How Reform Broke the Golden State and How We Can Fix It (University of California, 2010).

# # #

Read this article and more at NBC Bay Area by clicking HERE

Mike Gatto is the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee of the California State Assembly.  He represents the cities of Burbank, Glendale, and the Los Angeles neighborhoods of Los Feliz and Silver Lake.  E-mail Mike at: assemblymember.gatto@assembly.ca.gov, or call (818) 558-3043.

Website of Assemblyman Mike Gatto: www.asm.ca.gov/gatto

KCET Praises Assemblyman Mike Gatto's efforts to strengthen voting requirements for Constitutional Amendments

California Constitution, Altered Over 500 Times; U.S. Constitution, Only 27

by Jessica Levinson - September 3, 2012 10:00 AM

Last week our state's lower legislative house rejected a bill that would have made it harder to qualify and approve of initiatives that change California's constitution. Assemblyman Mike Gatto, a Democrat from Los Angeles, sponsored the bill that would have made an enormous amount of sense. Let's hope it comes back again, successfully passes both legislative houses, and is signed by the Governor. Here's why.

It is distressingly easy to amend our state constitution through a disturbingly broken process -- the ballot initiative process. A constitution should be a basic governing document. It should be difficult to alter it. It should be altered only after an open, deep, and thorough debate. Ours is not; it has been amended well over 500 times. It is one of the most bloated constitutions in modern history. Compare our state constitution, in existence for 133 years, to our federal constitution, in existence for 223 years: It has been amended only 27 times.

The ballot initiative process simply makes it far too easy to propose, qualify, and pass citizen-initiated laws. Gatto's bill would have required more voter signatures to qualify initiatives. Further, his proposal would have required that constitutional amendments pass by a vote of 55 percent of voters taking part in the election in which the measure appeared on the ballot.

Gatto's proposal was quite rationale. Constitutional amendments should not pass by a simple majority of those who show up to the polls in any given election.

We live in a representative democracy. The ballot initiative process was designed as a safety valve for citizens when the legislative process failed to function properly. Now, because the initiative process is largely dominated by the same special interests we created the process to guard against, both the legislative and initiative processes are in need of serious reform.

Gatto's proposal would have been a step in the right direction.

Jessica Levinson writes about the intersection of law and government. She is an Associate Clinical Professor at Loyola Law School. 

Read this article and more at KCET HERE

# # #

Mike Gatto is the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee of the California State Assembly.  He represents the cities of Burbank, Glendale, and the Los Angeles neighborhoods of Los Feliz and Silver Lake.  E-mail Mike at: assemblymember.gatto@assembly.ca.gov, or call (818) 558-3043.

Website of Assemblyman Mike Gatto: www.asm.ca.gov/gatto

Gatto’s Reform To Fix California’s Constitutional Amendment Process Clears Key Hurdle

CRAIG SHERWOOD, JULY 6, 2012   Tuesday, Assemblyman Mike Gatto’s (D-Los Angeles) Assembly Constitutional Amendment (ACA) 10, an important reform measure to protect the sanctity of California’s constitution, passed the Assembly Committee on Elections and Redistricting by a vote of 4-1.

The measure, part of Gatto’s package of constitutional reforms, seeks greater parity between the U.S. Constitution and California’s when it comes to the amendment process. The U.S. Constitution has been amended 27 times in 223 years, whereas California’s Constitution has been amended 521 times in roughly half the time, requiring only a simple majority of the electorate to amend.

“I would submit that one of the reasons our country has not been torn apart by strife is that, to amend our governing document, you need consensus.  California’s Constitution has been treated by special interests as just another statute, subject to the temporary whims of the majority of voters who show up and vote in any given year,” said Gatto.

ACA 10 seeks closer parity with the Federal Constitution in two ways. First, it would require a 55% majority to approve a new initiative constitutional amendment. Second, it would add a geographic-distribution requirement for signature gathering among the state’s far-flung and diverse Senate districts.

“These changes would ensure that amendments to our state’s constitution reflect the desires of the entire state.  It will also force those with the idea du jour to actually go discuss it with their fellow citizens across the state.”

Only 24 states even have an initiative process. Half of those states have similar geographic-distribution requirements, several require that votes cast far surpass the simple majority threshold, and six have gone as far as to forbid initiatives from amending their constitutions.

“A constitution should be a sacred, hallowed document that contains fundamental governing principles and rights.  I expect to have the support of my colleagues, who believe in the sanctity of the Federal Constitution and the wisdom of our Founding Fathers, to support taking these steps to ensure California’s Constitution is similarly protected,” said Gatto.  “No right is permanent, and no reform has any teeth, if it can be repealed at the very next election.”

ACA 10 now heads to the Assembly Appropriations Committee for consideration.

Article from Burbank N Beyond, read this article at Burbank N Beyond HERE

# # #

Mike Gatto is the Assistant Speaker Pro Tempore of the California State Assembly.  He represents the cities of Burbank, Glendale, and parts of Los Angeles, including Los Feliz, North Hollywood, Silver Lake, Toluca Lake, Valley Glen, and Van Nuys.  He has served in the Assembly since June 2010.  E-mail Mike at: assemblymember.gatto@assembly.ca.gov, or call (818) 558-3043.

Website of Assemblyman Mike Gatto: www.asm.ca.gov/gatto

Press-Enterprise Editorial: Favors Mike Gatto's Ballot-Box Reform

The Press-Enterprise becomes another in a growing chorus of major publications to editorialize in favor of my ballot-box budgeting fixes.

THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE
Published: 02 July 2012 05:20 PM

"Haphazard budgeting at the ballot box only ensures that the state’s fiscal turmoil will continue. California needs to use available resources wisely. Voters should help advance that effort by rejecting ballot measures that create arbitrary spending formulas and new earmarks.

Ballot-box budgeting is the issue behind AB 2220, by Assemblyman Mike Gatto, D-Los Angeles. The bill would mandate a ballot pamphlet reminder to voters about proposed initiatives that would raise new revenue and dedicate it to specific programs. The official analysis of such measures would have to include language specifying that the money raised by the initiative would go only to the intended programs, and would not be available for other state needs unless voters approved changes later. The requirement would not apply to tax measures that directed the resulting money into the general fund without restriction.

The fate of AB 2220, now in the Senate, is unclear. Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed nearly identical legislation last year, saying that a rote disclaimer in initiative analyses “won’t provide voters greater clarity.” Well-informed voters, of course, already know that legislators have little power to alter initiatives — which is one reason ballot measures are popular with an electorate that distrusts the Legislature.

Regardless of how the bill fares, however, Gatto has a legitimate point: Voters too often decide budget-related ballot measures with little insight into the state’s larger financial picture — or the consequences that result from such disjointed fiscal choices.

California has many voter-approved propositions that limit budgeting flexibility. The most sweeping is Prop. 98, the 1988 measure that requires about 40 percent of the budget to go to education. Prop. 99, also from 1988, raised the cigarette tax and earmarked the money for health programs. Prop. 172 in 1993 raised the sales tax to fund law enforcement. Prop. 10 in 1998 raised the cigarette tax again, directing the money toward early childhood development programs. Prop. 64, in 2004, taxed wealthy Californians to pay for mental health services.

Such tinkering blocks any attempt to set sensible priorities for public spending, and helps make state budgeting more opaque and convoluted. The Legislature should be directing available funds to sustain the most crucial programs first. Instead, the state wrestles with ways to pay for priority services while tax money flows unchecked to less critical programs. Thus Prop. 49, from 2002, requires the state to spend nearly $550 million a year on after-school programs when districts struggle to fund classroom instruction.

Yes, the Legislature has an abysmal record of making shortsighted, reckless financial decisions. But voters will not encourage greater fiscal responsibility by approving arbitrary spending dictates based on whatever cause happens to gain sufficient popular support.

Randomly disrupting sensible allocation of public money is not a strategy for fixing the state’s chronic fiscal woes. Good intentions do not justify ballot measures that make the state’s budget more intractable."

Read more HERE

# # #

Mike Gatto is the Assistant Speaker Pro Tempore of the California State Assembly.  He represents the cities of Burbank, Glendale, and parts of Los Angeles, including Los Feliz, North Hollywood, Silver Lake, Toluca Lake, Valley Glen, and Van Nuys.  He has served in the Assembly since June 2010.  E-mail Mike at: assemblymember.gatto@assembly.ca.gov, or call (818) 558-3043.

Website of Assemblyman Mike Gatto: www.asm.ca.gov/gatto