"The truth, always the truth--at all costs"
|
| 9022 07/27/2010 Lobbyists Have Leverage Over California Lawmakers Karen de Sá |
| http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15561984?nclick_check=1 [San Jose Mercury News] A push to rein in the leverage lobbyists have over California lawmakers By Karen de Sá Posted: 07/21/2010 08:19:26 AM PDT Updated: 07/21/2010 08:19:30 AM PDT Voicing concern over the Mercury News finding that special interests increasingly dominate Sacramento lawmaking, key state legislators predicted this week that a package of reforms will be enacted this year to address the issue. The reforms would limit the number of bills lawmakers can introduce, and subject them to closer scrutiny. "There's a real problem up here," said Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord, who with Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles, is spearheading statewide legislative reforms. Reacting to the newspaper reports this month that more than a third of all bills introduced in the past legislative session had a special interest as a "sponsor," DeSaulnier said limiting bills is a necessary change: "And the sooner we do that the better." The two have worked for months to develop a reform package to address the "crisis in governance" they say has taken hold, and believe that they have backing from legislative leaders to enact their proposals before the next term begins. But there were immediate worries that the proposals do not go far enough to correct problems exposed this month by the newspaper probe, which documented a sharp increase in the percentage of sponsored bills, and the likelihood they will pass, since term limits took hold in the 1990s. The newspaper showed that legislators receive significant campaign support from sponsors whose bills they carry. Derek Cressman, the regional director of Common Cause, said Tuesday that experience suggests stricter limits on the number of bills is not likely to result in the significant change that legislative leaders predict. And a local Assembly member, Jim Beall, a San Jose Democrat, proposed much more direct reform, calling for every legislator to clearly state upon introduction of their bills who the sponsor is and whether that sponsor has contributed to his or her political campaign. "When you give a public presentation on the bill you should say this bill has a sponsor and I received a donation from the sponsor and it's so much money," Beall said. "That's a good reform." Cressman noted that the Mercury News found the percentage of sponsored bills has increased in recent years, even though the Legislature already has enacted a series of increasingly tighter limits on the number of bills each lawmaker can introduce. He expressed concern that legislators would favor introducing sponsored bills over their own bills, since "nonsponsored bills do not generate campaign contributions." But other political reformers inside the Capitol are more confident the rule changes will have an impact on lobbyist-driven bills. Speakers of both the Assembly and Senate have vowed to adjust the bill caps by December, in advance of the 2011-12 legislative session, reducing the number of bills senators can introduce each two-year session from 40 to 30 and a reduction for Assembly members from 40 to 27. "The reduction in the number of bills will create the opportunity to give especially close scrutiny to each piece of legislation because there will be more time for that analysis to take place," Feuer said. Bill limits will "bring back some of the power to the public sector that's gone to the 'Third House,' " added DeSaulnier, referring to the moniker for Sacramento lobbyists. "Our expectation is not just fewer bills but more time on the calendar for oversight — a calendar with many more hearings." Lawmakers in both houses agreed with skeptics that bill limits alone will not go far enough in weeding out narrowly crafted sponsored bills — if added scrutiny does not accompany the reduction. "If we had more public hearings and more scrutiny, that would help — it would directly counter narrow-interest bills," Beall said. With deeper, nonpartisan analysis, Beall added, "we would be able to understand the bills better and maybe ferret out some of the sneaky things that are added into the bills that benefit individuals." Although California has more disclosure about sponsored bills than other states, even its disclosure is less than ideal. The sponsors of bills are typically not clearly identified, but found buried in analyses by legislative committees. Some committees do not list the sponsors, while others do. The analysts rely on the legislator to voluntarily disclose whether there is a sponsor. And nowhere do they reveal the extent of the sponsors' role, which can range from helping craft the bill to actively steering it through the Legislature. The newspaper probe also found another troublesome area: Legislators can direct lawyers in the Legislative Counsel's office, which draws up bill language, to deal directly with the sponsors' lobbyists, letting them play an even greater role in crafting the language of the bill. Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego, said the sponsors behind bills will be more thoroughly revealed if the total number of bills is reduced, and he supports the reforms under way. "The big problem in California is you'll have 20 bills scheduled for a hearing — and it's like bam-bam-bam — you don't have time for people to engage and get into the meat of these things and expose some bad ideas." Sen. Mark Wyland, R-Carlsbad, agrees. Wyland is pushing for no bills to be introduced in the first year of each session. "We don't address the fundamental problems facing the state of California and we don't do it because we are in a bill factory," Wyland said. "There's not a single major issue that we analyze in depth." -- http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15467061?source=pkg [San Jose Mercury News] Sponsored bills: methodology and glossary Mercury News Posted: 07/10/2010 03:56:31 PM PDT Updated: 07/12/2010 08:42:19 AM PDT The Mercury News spent more than a year on the first-ever examination of how outside sponsors dominate California lawmaking. Mercury News staff writer Karen de Sá, former Mercury News Sacramento correspondent Edwin Garcia, director of news research Leigh Poitinger and intern Sarah Yokubaitis scoured the 4,865 regular-session bills introduced in the Assembly and Senate in the last full session, spanning 2007 and 2008. Using LexisNexis and the state's legislative information website, the team built a database of the 1,883 bills that had outside "sponsors" noted in the analyses prepared by legislative staff. De Sá replicated that study for the 5,976 bills in the 1993-94 legislative session, a term before the voter-approved term-limit law had cost any legislators their seats. Finally, she used campaign reports to the Secretary of State to tally $1,214,740 in donations from bill sponsors and their key executives to legislators who introduced their bills. LAWMAKING TERMS TO KNOW Bill: A proposed law introduced into one of the two legislative houses, the Assembly or Senate. Sponsor: An organization or individual that develops a bill and finds a legislator to introduce it. Sponsors, typically represented by lobbyists, not only write bills but are responsible for winning support through the legislative process and making decisions on amendments. Sponsors often give campaign contributions to legislators who work on behalf of their bills. Legislators: The 80 Assembly members and 40 Senate members who introduce and vote on bills, and retain final say on strategy and amendments. Legislators introduce, or "author," the bills considered each session, and then they work on behalf of those bills through the process. Legislators often go to committee hearings armed with talking points and fact sheets prepared by sponsors and their lobbyists. Lobbyist: The representative of the sponsor who works to win support for a client's bills. Lobbyists buttonhole members for votes and accompany legislators to committee hearings, often sitting alongside them to answer questions posed by other lawmakers. They offer legislators advice and counsel, as well as dinners, entertainment tickets and other gifts paid for by their clients. Lobbyists advise sponsors on legislators who merit campaign contributions. Private interest: A category of sponsors including corporations and trade associations, whose purpose often is to enhance profit or ease regulations. — Mercury News |
