SACRAMENTO — As Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Year of Reform ends with a thud, here's a concept: Give regular folks a shot.
Under a new proposal, voters chosen at random would form a "citizens' assembly" -- no politicos allowed -- to study California's political system and suggest improvements. Their ideas would pass muster, or not, with all voters at the ballot box.
For The Record
Los Angeles Times Thursday January 05, 2006 Home Edition Main News Part A Page 2 National Desk 2 inches; 79 words Type of Material: Correction
Voting method -- An article in the Dec. 26 California section about a Citizens' Assembly proposal for the state described a voting method recommended by a similar assembly in British Columbia, Canada. The article said that in the Canadian proposal, voters could make three choices for the provincial government, so that three people, rather than one, would represent each district. In fact, voters could make any number of choices, and the number of people representing the districts could vary.
The way California elects its lawmakers and other officials needs a face lift, says Assemblyman Joe Canciamilla, but "the system is not designed to change itself."
The Democrat from Pittsburg and Assemblyman Keith Richman (R-Northridge) plan to introduce the citizen idea when the Legislature convenes next month.
"However bad the public thinks [the system] is, it is worse," said Richman. "I know this sounds corny, but what we're trying to do is to restore representative democracy."
Both men will be surprised if California's Legislature goes along with them, so they're also readying the proposal as an initiative, possibly for next year.
The concept is in its infancy, but there is Internet chatter about citizens' assemblies and academic interest around the world.
Such a group would be like a jury, only larger. To start, 200 names would be picked randomly from voter registration rolls in each of California's 80 Assembly districts. Those 16,000 voters would be invited to town hall-type meetings to learn details and express interest or withdraw.
Ultimately, one man and one woman would be selected, again randomly, from each district, 160 people in all. Ten more members could be added to balance the demographics. Members would receive travel expenses and a $1,000-a-month stipend.
Political insiders would be barred: Anyone holding elective federal, state or local office, their direct appointees and their immediate family members could not participate. Nor could political consultants or registered lobbyists.
Once selected, the citizens, endowed with a $20-million budget, would spend two weekends a month for one year studying the electoral system and alternatives to it and holding public hearings to get more ideas.
Richman and Canciamilla, each of whom is heading into his final year in the lower house, said they hope such a group would address the drawing of legislative boundaries, campaign fundraising and term limits. Their proposal says the citizens could make any suggestions they wished about any part of California's electoral process except the way state judges are elected.
The group would report its conclusions to the Legislature, which would have three months to critique them, though it wouldn't have the power to change them. The citizens' assembly could then modify its own ideas, which would go on the statewide ballot in 2008.
The proposal comes as Schwarzenegger rings out his Year of Reform having lost all four initiatives that he promoted on last month's special election ballot. And polls show that fewer than 40% of voters approve of his job performance.
But the governor who promised to "blow up" the boxes of politics and government isn't the only one who has tried and failed to bring about change.
In the mid-1990s, a commission was set up to revise the state Constitution. After spending three years studying it, the panel suggested many fixes: a single-house Legislature, limits on fund-raising, an overhaul of the budget and the public school system, conversion of some elective offices to appointed ones and more. The Legislature did not approve any of them.
In theory, a citizens' assembly could conclude that California's political system works well and offer no suggestions. Richman, Canciamilla and the New America Foundation, a think tank pushing the concept, doubt such an outcome.
New America is a nonpartisan group based in Washington, with an office in Sacramento. Its goal is to expand the political center. It gets the bulk of its money from the Ford Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Pew Charitable Trusts and other such organizations.
"We have tried everything else to fix our broken government, and nothing has worked," said Lenny Mendonca, a member of New America's board and a partner at the consulting firm McKinsey & Co.
He said he believes wealthy donors would give money to help pass an initiative that would authorize a citizens' assembly. "There absolutely is money for things that people think could work."
There's already a blog devoted to "citizens' assembly developments throughout the world." It notes comments by professors at Harvard and at a university in Taiwan and proposals to convene assemblies in Britain, Australia and elsewhere.
No state in the U.S. has tried a citizens' assembly, although British Columbia has and other Canadian provinces are contemplating it. In British Columbia, the group included a dog walker, a dry-wall installer, an Oxford graduate, a woman who managed a Vancouver cigar store and many more.
