The fights for “fair districts” and the abolition of term limits have a new champion: the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce.

Led by George Kieffer, the chamber announced Nov. 12 its support for the elimination of term limits and redistricting reform. Long active in California politics, the 116-year-old Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce is one of the largest business organizations in the state.

Although the chamber is not interested in starting petitions, Kieffer said the chamber would provide citizens information on its position to support any future referendum.

Kieffer, chairman of the chamber’s board of directors, presented the idea of amending the state’s policies during a Nov. 11 meeting. Members voted to accept Kieffer’s proposal and to develop a “broad-based” coalition of state citizens and California businesses to affect change.

“Our focus is really in creating competitive districts that will help us do away with term limits completely,” Kieffer said. “It was a generally broad agreement [in the chamber] that things need to change.”

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not released a comment on the chamber’s endorsement, but Kieffer said the Republican governor has previously floated ideas of amending polices concerning term limits and redistricting.

Kieffer, counsel to the governor’s wife, Maria Shriver, and a former member of Schwarzenegger’s gubernatorial transition team, said the chamber spent months discussing the state’s redistricting and term limit policies before reaching a decision to support change. Kieffer said a clear opinion on the matter formed after the chamber’s October retreat.

“It’s been a long time coming,” he said.

The Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce is the latest major organization to come out against term limits and redistricting practices in California. The Public Policy Institute of California, a non-partisan government watchdog group, released a study Nov. 10 claiming the state’s 16-year-old policy on term limits has “seriously undermined the effectiveness of the state’s legislative branch and should be modified.”

The report, authored by political science professors with the University of California system, contends that restrictions on elected officials have only reinforced political policies and pre-existing behaviors. Copies of the institute’s report are available at www.ppic.org.

Although supporters of term limits had hoped the restrictions would create a new breed of politician, a “citizen legislator,” the institute’s report claims most elected officials mimic the old incumbents’ policies and political ambitions. The term limit rules restrict assembly members to three terms, or six years, and senators to two terms, or eight years. Kieffer said the current system has created a “void of experience” in the state Legislature.

Voters approved the term limit initiative, Proposition 140, in 1990 with 52 percent of the vote, and the state implemented the policy in 1996. California, the first of 16 states to enact term limitations on a state legislature, has the most restrictive policy in the nation.

Although studies have shown legislative term limits have allegedly adverse affects on representative government, citizens have overwhelmingly voted down measures to alter restrictions on elected officials. Kieffer hopes to change opinions on term limits through an “open dialogue” on the subject.

“The more that we get people talking and educated, the more people will be less favorable on term limits,” Kieffer said.

While the institute’s study proposes amending the term limit policy (allowing elected officials a total of 14 years in office), Kieffer hopes to abandon term restrictions altogether by creating “competitive” political districts.

Kieffer, a Democrat, is accustomed to working with peoples of all political backgrounds and believes an inclusive effort will sway opinions on term limits and redistricting.

Kieffer believes previous and current efforts have failed to connect with voters because they have used the policies to attack the party in power.
Kieffer said a current petition drive for fair districting by conservative Ted Costa could falter if the movement does not shed its partisan roots and gain “broad-based support buy groups and civic leaders.”

“As long as [Costa’s movement] keeps that image, it will have difficulty gaining traction,” he said.

Costa, a founder of the October 2003 gubernatorial recall, has the only active redistricting petition. Claiming he has 100,000 of the 600,000 signatures needed to force his initiative to a referendum, Costa said he would like to meet Kieffer to discuss combining their efforts.

“It’s up to all of us who want to change this [redistricting] to work together,” Costa said. “I’m glad he’s come forward and I’d like to meet him eyeball to eyeball to work together on the gerrymandering going on in this state.”

Currently, the California Constitution authorizes the state legislature to redraw district lines after a federal census. Like any other bill, the governor has the authority to approve or veto proposed districts. Costa’s petition gives voters the “ultimate authority.” A three-judge panel would evaluate the validity of any redistricting efforts and would hear appeals from concerned citizens. A description of Costa’s petition is available at www.fairdistricts.com.

Kieffer also supports a non-partisan group to govern the appropriation of representative districts.

Both initiatives have received support and resistance from members of the Republican and Democratic parties.

Costa hopes to get a referendum on fair districts before voters in the next statewide election. Kieffer said the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce would begin its campaign for change immediately.