A judicious fix on term limits

The term limits approved by California voters in 1990 have been a disaster for the legislative process. Their promise of replacing career politicians with citizen-legislators has not been realized. Its main effect has been to elevate the influence of special interests while creating a revolving door where novices rise to leadership posts and lawmakers start positioning for their next office from the moment they get to the Capitol.

Proposition 28 represents a sensible, straightforward reform that maintains a 12-year ceiling while addressing the most serious deficiency of current law: the six-year limit on Assembly members. Senators are limited to eight years.

Under Prop. 28, a legislator could serve his or her 12 years in either house — in any combination.

This change in law, while reducing a legislator’s maximum service from 14 years to 12, could significantly buffer the negative consequences of term limits.

The most profound problems with the current restrictions have been in the 80-member Assembly, where terms run just two years and members are leaving before they really have a chance to learn their way around the Capitol corridors. Members rise to committee chairs and other leadership positions before they are ready. Speaker John Pérez, a Los Angeles Democrat, gained the top spot in his first term.

The effects of the revolving-door syndrome reverberate through the ranks. Legislators don’t have time to get to know the issues in depth, and feel the demand to raise money to campaign for a new office once they are termed out. Each effect plays into the hands of special interests that possess the knowledge the politicians lack and the contributions they desire. Neither contributes to long-term thinking about the major challenges facing the state.

There is no single elixir for Sacramento dysfunction, but Prop. 28 directly addresses one of its prime sources. We recommend its passage.