WALTERS: Jury is still out on impact of reforms
Published: Thursday, November 22, 2012 at 3:00 a.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 at 5:16 p.m.
Every California election is customarily followed by journalistic and academic seminars in which campaign strategies are dissected, pre-election polls are regurgitated, and pundits crow about successes and confess failures in predicting outcomes.
The usual just-for-junkies autopsies are being staged in the wake of the Nov. 6 election. And one of the aspects being extensively explored is whether the two electoral reforms in place for the first time this year
The answer, at least from this quarter, is that they did change the atmosphere of this year’s elections for 153 legislative and congressional seats, but their impact on public policy remains an open question.
The two changes, adopted by voters over the opposition of leaders of both parties, were billed as not only ways to open up what had been a closed system of electing legislators, but as ways to lessen polarization, especially in the Legislature, and thus create a more responsive and productive institution.
Republicans, many of whom preferred the independent commission to redistricting by a Democrat-dominated Legislature, are unhappy that the election generated two-thirds Democratic supermajorities in both houses.
Many of the legislative and congressional races were decided by a very few votes, which attests to the more competitive nature of the commission’s plan, as well as the effect of the top-two primary.
There were 28 races in which candidates from the same party were vying, which meant they had to seek support from voters of the other party.
Whether it does and whether it means that the notoriously dysfunctional Legislature will finally address the state’s long-simmering, unresolved issues
Dan Walters is a columnist for the Sacramento Bee.
All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.