It’s hardball season at California’s state capitol, and we’re not talking baseball. At times like these, I think of two great political philosophers: Otto von Bismarck and Lily Tomlin.
Again, we are told the same adage from the 19th century German Chancellor Bismarck, which I paraphrase: Laws are like sausages. If you are afraid, don’t watch any of them being made.
Comedian and actress Tomlin used this wonderful truth in a standup skit: “No matter how cynical you become, you can’t survive.”
Politicians, with their cynical antics, always stay one step ahead of even our worst expectations.
It’s sausage-making time in Sacramento. Major policy decisions are always accompanied by political manipulation. But in an election year, pessimism is on steroids.
Here’s a current notable example: Democrats plan to pass a package of essential measures Laws to curb the growing incidence of retail theft, From small shops to professional robbery.
Thefts are not limited only to big complexes and ordinary shops.
“We have people pushing carts full of stuff out of the grocery store,” says Daniel Conway, chief lobbyist for the California Grocers Association. “They’re stealing for personal use.”
But the Democrats’ intent is reprehensible Insert a “poison pill” This would automatically nullify their own laws if a rival Ballot measure imposing tougher crime restrictions likely to be approved by voters in NovemberThis might seem strange to ordinary people.
Initiative, Sponsored by the California District Attorneys Association and funded primarily by large retailers, It qualified for the ballot after collecting nearly 900,000 voter signatures last week.
Democrats fear this ballot measure so much that they are making its supporters an offer they can’t refuse. At least, that’s what Democrats hope. The message: Take whatever you can get immediately from the legislation — or risk losing it if the ballot measure passes. And save the many millions of dollars it would take to promote the ballot measure.
Why are Democrats so opposed to this initiative? Progressive thinkers believe it goes too far and will lead to prisons being filled again with people who don’t deserve to be there.
“This initiative is a return to mass incarceration,” said state Senate Leader Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg). “We need to learn from the mistakes of the past. California incarcerated a generation of residents from Black and brown communities across the Golden State.
“It would be a shame for us if we rolled out the red carpet again on mass incarceration.”
Well, that’s one reason Democrats hate this initiative. But hardly anyone believes that it’s the main reason. It seems that the party’s greatest fear is that the measure will help Republican candidates, especially in cases where Republican candidates can win the election. There are a handful of congressional races where control of the U.S. House is at stake.
“Yes, it’s good for Republican candidates,” said state Assembly GOP leader James Gallagher of Yuba City, referring to the initiative. “But it’s good policy, too. It’s also going to be good for Democrats who support the initiative.”
Democratic consultant Steve Maviglio says the initiative “will appeal to swing voters. People are seeing crime go up. Democrats have a reputation for being soft on crime. Republicans see blood in the water. They want to talk about crime. Democrats don’t do that.”
Another reason Democrats inserted the poison pill is that it would give their fellow Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta license to change the initiative’s official ballot title and summary, along with a dire warning to voters: If the proposal passes, it would kill the Legislature’s anti-crime reform bill.
But then the ambitious Bonta would risk tarnishing his image by looking like just another washed-up politician.
Let us go back to the first inning of this political game.
In 2014, voters passed Proposition 47, which reduced penalties for theft and hard drug possession. One key feature: If the stolen goods were worth less than $950, the crime was generally treated as a misdemeanor, meaning a very light jail sentence, if any.
Law enforcement officials and retailers have long been calling for changes to 47, especially as thefts have increased during the pandemic. They justifiably claim that thieves are not paying for their crimes.
But the Legislature did nothing until district attorneys and retailers pushed their own initiative to roll back much of Proposition 47 by toughening penalties for serious drug crimes, including retail theft and fentanyl possession. The $950 threshold for a third offense would be eliminated so repeat shoplifters could be charged with a felony. And people convicted of multiple drug offenses would be forced into treatment.
The Legislature responded with a package of 14 bills that Republicans supported — until Democrats unveiled their poison pill plan. The legislative package basically gives DAs more opportunities to prosecute and generally pursues the same aims as the initiative, just with a softer touch.
Outspoken Democrats argue that the self-destruct amendment — they don’t call it a poison pill — is necessary because there is a policy “conflict” between legislation and the initiative.
Of course, there are conflicts, but there are no conflicts that cannot be resolved through legislative negotiations.
Governor Gavin Newsom has not promised to sign the bill, but there is little doubt that he will do so. He wants to remove this initiative from the ballot.
Will this prompt supporters of the poison pill initiative to back off? The deadline to finalize the ballot measure is June 27.
“Some of the companies that supported this initiative are going to have to reevaluate,” says Rachel Michelin, president and CEO of the California Retailers Association. “There are a lot of things in the bill package that are not in this initiative. These are good bills.”
Gregory Totten, CEO of the California District Attorneys Association, says his group intends to pursue the initiative even if the big retailers back out. “We have a lot of other (campaign) donors, too,” he says.
“You have to go back to the voters to fix 47. Legislators have been very reluctant to do that.”
But maybe that’s the smart thing for Democrats to do: Put a compromise measure on the ballot that each of the belligerent sides can adopt. And kill the initiative. A home run.
