"California political watchdog sets sights on major cases"

A nice profile of the FPPC, and outgoing Chair (future FEC Commissioner) Ann Ravel. 

Here is an excerpt:

Last fall, the panel sought to discover the source of $11 million in contributions from a mysterious Arizona group to oppose Brown’s tax increase ballot measure and support a campaign finance initiative challenging the political dominance of labor unions. In November, the commission won a lawsuit forcing the group to reveal that the donor was from Virginia. The FPPC and state Attorney General Kamala Harris are still investigating to learn the names of the financial backers.

“The Arizona case showed Californians and it showed members of the public throughout the country the shell game that corporations can play when they want to spend money in politics,” said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. “But it also presented a real opportunity for people to try to reform that influence. What people woke up to was the head of California’s watchdog was actually pushing for this before the case and literally was at theCalifornia Supreme Court at midnight filing briefs.”

Last month, the agency moved swiftly to unmask the mystery donor behind a signature-gathering effort to force a public vote on city financial aid for a new arena for the Sacramento Kings. Under the legal scrutiny, Seattle investor Chris Hansen acknowledged contributing $100,000 to the petition drive.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/09/22/5757521/california-political-watchdog.html#storylink=cpy

"Justices Should Think of Quarter Pounders in Latest Money in Politics Case"

A great blog post from Ciara Torres-Spelliscy.

Ann Ravel Confirmed to the Federal Elections Commission

A hearty congratulations to current Chair of the FPPC, future FEC Commissioner Ann Ravel, who was just confirmed today by the U.S. Senate!

A short piece I wrote for the HuffPo re Ann Ravel's nomination to the FEC is here.

California Gives Expanded Rights to Noncitizens

Honored to have been quoted on the front page of the NYT, above the fold:

LOS ANGELES — California is challenging the historic status of American citizenship with measures to permit noncitizens to sit on juries and monitor polls for elections in which they cannot vote and to open the practice of law even to those here illegally. It is the leading edge of a national trend that includes granting drivers’ licenses and in-state tuition to illegal immigrants in some states and that suggests legal residency could evolve into an appealing option should immigration legislation fail to produce a path to citizenship.

With 3.5 million noncitizens who are legal permanent residents in California, some view the changes as an acknowledgment of who is living here and the need to require some public service of them. But the new laws raise profound questions about which rights and responsibilities rightly belong to citizens over residents.

“What is more basic to our society than being able to judge your fellow citizens?” asked Jessica A. Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School, referring to jury service. “We’re absolutely going to the bedrock of things here and stretching what we used to think of as limits.”

FPPC Chair Ann Ravel comes to Loyola Law School

I am so grateful to FPPC Chair Ann Ravel for coming to Loyola Law School yesterday and today to share her thoughts and insights on political reform, disclosure, civic engagement, and many other issues. 

Appearances Matter in Politics, Especially When You're Under Investigation

Here is another entry for the "politicians exercising questionable judgment" file cabinet, which, unfortunately, continues to fill up on a daily basis.

California State Senator Ronald Calderon is the subject of a federal corruption investigation. Let that sentence linger for a moment, shall we? Calderon is a public servant; by definition he should be serving the public, in this case his constituents. His first responsibility is to represent those in his state senate district. But there is now some question as to whether he is doing that, or whether he used his office for personal gain.

In this situation it would behoove any representative to be particularly thoughtful and careful, to attempt to make decisions which give no fodder to an already-distrustful public. Unfortunately, Calderon appears not to have done that.

Calderon has chosen another scandal-plagued individual, former Bell Gardens City Councilman Mario Beltran, to be the public face of Calderon's office. Beltran is his chief spokesperson. Beltran served on the Bell Gardens city council. He pleaded guilty to misusing campaign money and was convicted of filing a false police report.

Let's assume, because we must, that Calderon is innocent until proven guilty. Let's also take Beltran at his word that he is a changed man and assume he reformed. And let's do more than that. Let's believe, as I do, that people can change and mature, and therefore deserve second chances. The question still remains, is it wise for someone Calderon's position pick someone with Beltran's history to represent him when the public already looks at their representatives with a wary eye? Appearances matter in politics.

Finish reading this post on KCET.org. 

San Diego Mayor Bob Filner to resign on Aug. 30

Quoted in this article in Reuters re San Diego Mayor Filner's resignation. 

Jessica Levinson, an associate clinical professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said Filner's only bargaining chip in discussions with the city had been his threat to remain in office.

"It sounds like it's an actual compromise, both sides get something," she said. "Ultimately what San Diego needs is for Filner to step down and for them to have a functioning mayor who's allowed in City Hall, and that the city doesn't fear that if he's allowed around women something bad is going to happen."

RNC doesn’t want you to hear from their presidential candidates

My latest piece appears on The Hill's Congress Blog. 

Here is an excerpt:

Last week the Republican National Committee (RNC) unanimously passed a resolution to prevent NBC and CNN from hosting Republican primary debates unless those networks halt production of films about former first lady, senator, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In response to this news I have three words, “get over it.”


The RNC believes that both projects will essentially be endorsements of Clinton, a possible (likely? probable? almost certain?) Democratic candidate for the 2016 presidential election, and that therefore NBC and CNN will not be able to fairly host Republican presidential debates. It is worth pointing out that at least in the case of NBC’s planned miniseries, the entertainment division of the network would be responsible for the project, and the news division would be in charge of any debates. Will viewers appreciate the difference? Maybe not.

Still, the RNC’s move is more than a little ironic for a number of reasons.
 

An Open Letter to San Diego Mayor Bob Filner

Dear Mayor Bob Filner,

You do not know me, but like the rest of the sane individuals following your sexual harassment scandal, let me tell you, it is time to resign. Actually, allow me to restate that: It was time to resign weeks ago.
First, let me say I do believe in the fundamental principle that people are innocent until proven guilty. You have yet to have been found liable or guilty of anything in a court of law. But here is a news flash for you: You are an elected official. Members of the electorate went to the ballot box and put their faith in you to represent them fairly and honestly. You are failing to do that.

Now, you may ask, does it set a bad precedent to tell an official to resign just because he is accused of wrong doing? The answer is, it absolutely would if that were what I'm advocating, but I am not. The sheer volume of the complaints lodged against you is stunning. The substance of the complaints -- a myriad of unwanted sexual advances -- is deplorable.
As you well know, appearances matter in politics. Appearances also matter in government. Yes, those two things are still somewhat different. When your constituents have lost faith in your ability to govern, not to mention be alone with any woman, it is time to go.

It is increasingly difficult to get members of the electorate to go to the polls and take part in local, state, and federal government. People feel disconnected from their representatives. While this is a real problem, and it is long past the time to change the public's low regard of government, I only wish more of your constituents felt more disconnected from you. Your decision to stay in office is doing nothing to help the people's view of their elected representatives.

The only silver lining here is that the complaints lodged against you are shocking. Thank goodness there is nothing routine or acceptable about what so many women now claim you have subjected them to. 

Finish reading this post on KCET.org.

Bites Lack of rules allow Sacramento politicians to blur private, public interests

Quoted in this one in the Sacramento News and Review:

Sacramento City Council members keep inventing new, creative ways to collect money and funnel it into their own political “brands.” And we need new rules to keep up with their inventions.

Last week, some local pro-labor Democrats asked the California attorney general and Fair Political Practices Commission to investigate Mayor Kevin Johnson’s 501(c)(3) organizations, and the collection of hundreds of thousands of dollars from Walmart, leading up to the vote on Sacramento’s contentious big-box store policy this week.

But when the Walmart battle is over, the problem will remain: These nonprofit organizations lack transparency, they lack clear rules, and they mix public resources with the council members’ political interests.
City Councilman Jay Schenirer’s organization, WayUp Sacramento, has gotten considerably less attention than the mayor’s efforts. But it blurs plenty of lines.

WayUp helps to fund programs for at-risk youth in Oak Park, and that’s a perfectly good thing to do.

But last year, Sacramento City Manager John Shirey said it was inappropriate for outside nonprofits—such as Johnson’s education nonprofit Stand Up, or his arena-booster group Think Big Sacramento—to operate out of City Hall or use city resources.

In some ways, Schenirer’s WayUp looks quite similar to Johnson’s groups. WayUp has a website, paid staff and receives big donations through the city’s “behest” system, just as the mayor’s nonprofits do—including checks from businesses like Walmart, AT&T, and Sutter Health, along with foundation support from the California Endowment. WayUp has taken in nearly $800,000 since Schenirer was elected in 2010.

So, why does WayUp get to operate in City Hall after K.J.’s nonprofits were shown the door? The short answer is that WayUp isn’t really a nonprofit, not yet. According to Schenirer, it’s a “brand.”

...

“It’s somewhat curious that ‘brand’ is the word they use,” says Jessica Levinson, professor of election law at Loyola Law School. “’Brand’ can certainly be seen as PR for the candidate.”

Like when Schenirer toured his district during National Night Out last week, handing out WayUp tote bags and buttons.

She’s not sure Schenirer is doing anything wrong, though, she adds, “The thing that feels a bit funny is that it is using government resources.”
Schenirer says “brand” applies to the community work WayUp does. But of course it’s an extension of Schenirer’s brand as a politician, and an extension of his professional brand, too.

Schenirer is an education consultant; that’s how he makes his money. Among WayUp’s stated goals are “an ambitious, rigorous, and comprehensive strategy of reform” for schools in Schenirer’s district. He told Bites that school reform is “a generic term,” and that, in this case, it means noncontroversial things like school nutrition programs.

But the project description that WayUp sent to the U.S. Department of Education advocates policies that are related to the work done by Schenirer’s consulting business, Capitol Impact LLC, and its principals.

The WayUp brand seems to be where Schenirer’s interests as a public office holder, politician and professional education consultant all intersect. How much intersection is OK? That’s where some sort of city policy would be helpful.

...


They might want to keep an eye on Schenirer’s variation as well, which Levinson says makes for a “fascinating” but potentially problematic new tool for politicians.

“Until there’s more guidance, politicians will continue to do this. They’d be foolish not to,” she said.

Following GOP cash leads to questions

Quoted in this one in the Modesto Bee. 

Here is an excerpt:

In 2011 and 2012, Stanislaus County's Republican Party quietly became a player in state political finance, taking $1.7 million from big spenders and funneling most of it to superheated campaigns throughout California.
The metamorphosis was so hushed that some members of the county's central committee, the very group used by state party leaders to distribute the money, were unaware.

The California Fair Political Practices Commission, a state agency enforcing campaign ethics, confirmed to The Bee that the Stanislaus group's role in pooling and distributing cash is under investigation.
News of the probe has caused an uproar in the committee, particularly among members seated in January. Some say they got involved to help their party and were disturbed to find out about the money flow.

...

Jessica Levinson, a campaign finance and ethics expert at the Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said, "We live in a system where the number of permissible constraints is increasingly decreasing."

Read more here: http://www.modbee.com/2013/08/17/2869600/where-the-money-goes-head-here.html#storylink=cpy

 

Millions Wasted on Upgrading Voting Systems

Voting is called a preservative right, meaning it helps to preserve other rights.

The ability to exercise one's right to vote is a fundamental part of any functioning democracy. What does this ability entail? For one, those who are eligible to be able to vote should be able to do so easily. Further, once registered, voters should be able to go to the polls or mail in a ballot with relative ease as well. Finally, voters should be assured that when they cast their ballots the voting systems accurately read and record their votes. It should go without saying that each vote must be fairly and correctly counted.

Allegations of voting problems abounded in the 2000 presidential election between former Vice President Al Gore and former President George W. Bush abounded. That election, among other things, exposed problems related to punch card ballots. In the wake of that election, Congress passed in the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in 2002. As part of HAVA states receive money to help update voting systems. California received $380 million -- no small sum.

Now comes word here, here, and here that money received to upgrade voting systems have been wasted.

A state audit released last week found that, under the direction of the Secretary of State's Office, millions of dollars set aside for the improvement of voting systems have been misused.

Among the state's shortcomings are lack of clear and workable standards for satisfactory voting systems, lack of transparency in the distribution of funds, and money spent on projects that were not fully implemented.

Finish reading this post on KCET.org.

Should Legal Immigrants Be Allowed to Work at Election Polls?

In my book, the majority of people who pass certain eligibility requirements and wish to serve as poll workers should be welcomed and thanked, not excluded and turned away. Working at the polls is important, often tedious and monotonous job. Election day is virtually guaranteed to be a long day for anyone serving at the polls.

There is now a bill headed to Gov. Jerry Brown that would let some legal immigrants to serve as poll workers. Which legal immigrants you may ask? Well, legal permanent residents who would be eligible to vote if they were citizens.

Assembly Bill 817 places a limit on the number of non-citizen poll workers in each district. Election officials would be able to appoint five non-citizen poll workers in each precinct.

Democratic Assembly member Rob Bonta (Alameda) introduced the bill. He and democrats have argued that the bill would increase the number of multi-lingual poll workers who could then help multi-lingual voters who are not proficient in English. Republicans, who oppose the bill, have countered that the increase in the number of multilingual poll workers would not be particularly helpful as poll workers are prevented from doing things like reading the ballot to voters, or helping the voters understand the content of the ballot. In addition, there appears to be some disagreement as to how many eligible voters are not proficient in English because naturalized citizens must pass a written and verbal English test.

Finish reading this post on KCET.org.

Spokesman for California Assembly Speaker John Perez wears many hats

Quoted in this piece in the Sacramento Bee. 

Here is an excerpt: 

It's an unusual arrangement, even in a Capitol that thrives on close relationships between elected officials and the interest groups they govern.

"It seems like he's serving two masters," said Jessica Levinson, an expert in political ethics at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

"He may be doing a great job serving both of them, and he may not be doing anything improper. But at the very least it feels uncomfortable and improper because he is serving a legislator and serving clients who seek to influence that legislator."

...

Even with the distinction between lobbying and communications, Levinson said, working for the Assembly leader likely helps Maviglio solicit business from interest groups.

"As a private sector client, it makes all the sense in the world to hire someone who has the ear of a powerful legislator," she said.

Six California lawmakers took trip to Cuba with Capitol lobbyist

Quoted in this one in the Los Angeles Times. 

Six California lawmakers used political funds to take part in a March trip to Cuba with a top Capitol lobbyist, raising eyebrows among state government watchers.

The legislators disclosed the “cultural exchange” trip in campaign finance reports filed this week, visiting the communist country with lobbyist Darius Anderson, who heads a nonprofit group called Californians Building Bridges.

Anderson’s lobbying firm, Platinum Advisors, represents clients including AT&T, Anthem Blue Cross,DirecTV Group and Pfizer, some of which have also made political contributions to the lawmakers on the trip.

Those who dipped into campaign funds to pay for their trip included Sens. Ron Calderon (D-Montebello) and Cathleen Galgiani (D-Stockton) and Assembly members Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), Katcho Achadjian (R-San Luis Obispo), Holly Mitchell (D-Los Angeles) and Assembly Majority Leader Toni Atkins (D-San Diego). Calderon has been in the news because his Capitol office was raided by the FBI in June as part of a corruption probe. Calderon declined to comment.

Loyola Law School Professor Jessica Levinson, who studies government ethics, said it is a concern when lawmakers "spend a lot of time with a certain lobbyist. It means they may be more educated and attentive to the concerns of the lobbyist."

Democrats seize super PAC crown

Quoted in this one, by the Center for Public Integrity. 

“Despite ideological opposition to super PAC spending, I don’t see Democrats wanting to play on an uneven playing field,” said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School in California. “This is the political reality.”

Cupid's work gets complicated as California lawmaker dates lobbyist

Quoted in this piece in the Sac Bee. 

"We are talking about a relationship where one person's job is to try to influence people in the other person's position: a lobbyist representing a certain constituency over which this lawmaker has some decision-making power," said Jessica Levinson, an expert in political ethics at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

"The concern is always the same – is this elected official doing a good job? Is he serving the public? Or is there any chance the elected official is serving himself and making decisions based on who he is dating?"

A review of legislation the California Medical Association is lobbying this year shows Maienschein frequently – but not always – votes its way.

...

Levinson and other government watchdogs said Maienschein should step down from committees that routinely vote on bills the medical association lobbies, such as the health and business panels.

"I don't think we can say, 'Drop out of office, or stop dating this person,' but I think we can suggest, 'There may be a more appropriate committee for you to sit on,' " Levinson said.

Read more here: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2013/07/31/2608471/cupids-work-gets-complicated-as.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2013/07/31/2608471/cupids-work-gets-complicated-as.html#storylink=cpy

... 

Tracking the money flow between Central Basin Water District and Tom Calderon

Interviewed on KPCC for this piece.

Southern California has dozens of small public agencies that don’t get much attention. The Central Basin Municipal Water District is one of them, but it made headlines last month after getting a federal subpoena in connection with an investigation into State Senator Ron Calderon.

Federal officials have also sought to speak with his brother, political consultant Tom Calderon, who shares a long relationship with the Commerce-based water agency.

Tom Calderon left the state Assembly just over a decade ago and started a political consulting business. One of his first clients was the Central Basin District, which serves a broad expanse of Southeast L.A. County. Over the past several years, Calderon donated $26,000 to board candidates at the district.

"Most people give contributions, not because it makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside, but because they think there is some way that they can benefit from this candidate being in public office," said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School who specializes in election law and governance issues.

Over a 10-year period, the Central Basin District paid Calderon nearly $1 million to build relationships with state and federal politicians, develop community outreach strategies, and give general guidance to the district’s leaders. Contracts from those years describe Calderon as providing "valuable insight and guidance." At the same time, he was donating to board members who approved his lucrative contracts — which is legal.

"The link isn’t always that direct, but I think the question is always the same," Levinson said. "Are contributions really anything more than legalized bribery?”

(Because of the ongoing investigation, none of the district’s board members would comment for this story. Neither would Tom Calderon.) 

In 2012, two new board members, James Roybal and Leticia Vasquez, were elected as reform candidates. Early this year the board voted to terminate the district’s consulting contracts —including Calderon’s.

Kathay Feng, executive director of California Common Cause, which works to make  public officials and institutions accountable and responsive to citizens, said the Central Basin's policy is not an anomaly.

"Sadly, it’s pretty rare to have a bidder ban," Feng said. "That’s what would prevent a contribution from a company or individual who is seeking a contract from that city agency. We think it’s actually very common sense, but only a few cities have got it."

The City of Los Angles has such a policy. And, as it turns out, the Central Basin District recently revised its code of conduct. It now states companies and individuals cannot donate to board members while their contracts are in the approval process. Anyone doing business with the district is also prohibited from giving in the months just before and after an election. 

"It’s intended to prevent sense of favoritism or sense that someone’s voting for a particular project because they are getting donations from a particular vendor," said Joseph Legaspi, interim public affairs manager at Central Basin.

For entities that operate largely outside the public eye, Feng says the public can help force government to become transparent and accountable. She notes that the state controller has started posting the salaries of public employees.

"Here, I think it’s really a matter of public pressure and I think it is possible," Feng said. "We saw what happened so quickly after the Bell scandal. And if the public expresses a desire for it, I think often times our elected officials are responsive."

But small cities and agencies are often left to police themselves. At Central Basin, suspected violations of the district’s code of conduct are reported to the board’s two-member Ethics Committee. It’s up to them to report serious violations to the Fair Political Practices Commission or the District Attorney’s Office. 

"If someone had felt that a member of the Central Basin board of directors had not been compliant with the code of conduct, they do have the opportunity to raise that issue with the district’s Ethics Committee," Legaspi said.

In recent years, there have been no complaints taken to the Ethics Committee that were found to be valid or worthy of further investigation, according to Legaspi. The committee’s members include Phillip Hawkins, who last year was elected to his fourth term on the Water District board. Six days before the election, Hawkins received a donation that made up one-fourth of all the money he raised. It was  $10,000 — and it came from Tom Calderon.  

Gay Marriages Will Continue in California -- For Now

Many may not know that there is a still a legal battle raging over the fate of Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in California back in 2008. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Protect Marriage, the proponents of Prop 8, did not have legal standing to appeal their case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. As a result, the ruling by the trial court became the final word on the constitutionality of Prop 8. Judge Vaughn Walker had struck down Prop 8, finding that it violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Translation: same-sex marriages could resume after a more than four-year ban.

So why isn't this the end of the story?

Well, the couples who sued to declare Prop 8 unconstitutional hailed from two counties: Alameda and Los Angeles. Undeterred by losing at all three levels of the federal judicial system, Protect Marriage is now asking the California Supreme Court to find that Judge Walker's ruling only applied to the two counties. Put another way, they claim that Judge Walker's opinion does not apply statewide.

In a little noticed decision last week the California Supreme Court denied a request by Protect Marriage to halt gay marriages while it rules on Protect Marriage's claim as to the scope of Judge Walker's ruling. A ruling by the California Supreme Court is unlikely to come before August, at the earliest.

Finish reading this post on KCET.org. 

No More Special Elections, Please! Here Are 2 Ideas to Avoid Them

Almost every time elected officials leave their posts early, there is a special election. The word special makes it sound like there is something to celebrate -- there is not. These "special" elections cost all of us time and money. And they may not be worth it.

On Tuesday, July 23 there will be two special elections in the California legislature and one in the city of Los Angeles. The first is a Senate race in the Central Valley, where Senator Michael Rubio resigned to go work for Chevron Corporation as a government affairs manager. The second legislature race is in the 52nd Assembly District. there, former Assemblywoman Norma Torres played some musical chairs and became a State Senator. In L.A., 6th district City Council member Tony Cardenas left for Congress.

There will be additional special elections in September for two other former state legislators, both who left for to become members of the Los Angeles City Council. Those elections will be held in the San Fernando Valley, in the 45th Assembly District, and in Culver City, in the 26th Senate District.

In addition to costing time and money, special elections also tend to be very low turnout elections. This means that the representatives are often chosen by a small percentage of the eligible voters.

So what should we do?

Finish reading this post on KCET.org. 

Redistricting Controversy Hits LA City Council

Here is my appearance on the local NBC. 

How you draw the borders of legislative districts determines who gets elected to those districts, which is why it is a controversial process.

Now civil rights attorney Leo Terrell is calling for a federal investigation into the LA City Council, saying the boundaries of the 15 council districts were unfairly drawn.

"It is against the law to use race as a basis for redrawing district lines," Terrell said.

Terrell has filed a lawsuit against the city over the redistricting of council seats, based in part on the reported comment of a staffer for City Council President Herb Wesson. The staffer, when discussing one proposal for Wesson's district, allegedly said it contained "too many Mexicans."

"For a city councilman's representative to say we have too many Mexicans in the 10th District is insulting," Terrell said.

In fact, race has long been an issue in the drawing of legislative district borders, according to Loyola law professor Jessica Levinson. While it can be legally taken into consideration, it can't be the only consideration.

"Race has to be taken into account, in part to protect minorities," Levinson said. "We don't want to put all minorities in one district, so they only have power in one district, and we don't want to crack minorities up so they have diluted power in a a variety of districts."

Wesson's office says as the defendant in the litigation, it had no choice but not to comment.

I Am Luscious, and Other Campaign Slogans

I have this piece in Pacific Standard Magazine. 

Here is an excerpt: 

I have a new idea to increase civic engagement, and it is all about vegan food.

Some background for the non-hipsters out there. So all three of you, listen up. There is a vegan restaurant with locations, unsurprisingly, in Los Angeles, Santa Cruz, and Berkeley, the birthing centers of true hipster culture. The fun (or perhaps failure, depending on your perspective) of this chain is how they name their dishes: Each is a personal, positive, declarative statement. Instead of rice with lentils, you’ll order the “I Am Humble.” Feel like hummus and pesto? You’ll dine on the “I Am Abundant.”

If you’re a rain-on-your-parade curmudgeon like me, you’ll do your best to avoid ordering the dishes by their given names. Instead of confidently telling my server, “I Am Terrific,” I prefer to spend three minutes describing the dish, which is, as the name fails to indicate, made of kelp noodles. One of my very favorite dining companions suggested that I should “pick my battles,” but the opportunity to avoid announcing, “I Am Liberated” (another kelp noodle dish) is well worth the time I spend boorishly pointing at the menu.

"The Walking Dead Supreme Court"

Ciara Torres-Spelliscy blogs at the Huffington Post.

High-Profile L.A. Mayor Exits

A great, quick exploration of Mayor Villaraigosa's legacy in the WSJ. A few quotes by yours truly.  

Here is an excerpt:

Mr. Villaraigosa's tenure has "been a total mixed bag," said Jessica Levinson, a professor and government-reform expert at Loyola Law School. "Good things have happened in the city, but I'm not sure how many the mayor can take credit for," she added.

Los Angeles mayors operate with less power than their counterparts in many cities—notably having no direct control over city schools. Mr. Villaraigosa tried, and failed, to win some direct control over schools through state legislation. But over the years he pushed successfully to expand the number of charter schools in the city and battled publicly with the teachers union. He also formed a group that took over some low-performing schools from the district and ran them as charter schools, raising millions in private funding and raising graduation rates.

During Mr. Villaraigosa's tenure, the city expanded its public transportation system, increased bike lanes and reduced violent crime.

But Mr. Villaraigosa "also failed to do a lot of things," Ms. Levinson said. "We have more traffic. We're still not the nation's beacon when it comes to public transportation or green-tech jobs."

Got Prop 8? The VRA? And Voter Registration?

Here are links to my most recent SCOTUS-related op-eds.

The Supreme Court Rules There Is No One Left Standing To Appeal Prop. 8

Who’s Killing the Voting Rights Act, Congress or the Supreme Court?

Did Justice Scalia Just Make It Easier To Register To Vote?

The Supreme Court Rules There Is No One Left Standing To Appeal Prop. 8

My latest op-ed is up on Jurist, here. 

Here is the introduction:

In a 5-4 opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the US Supreme Court has ruled that there is simply no one left standing to appeal California's infamous 2008 ballot initiative, Proposition 8. Prop 8, as the entire world now knows, amended the California State Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman to the exclusion of same-sex marriages.

In the much-anticipated case, Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Court avoided the larger, and more politically charged issue potentially presented by the case: whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits California from defining marriage as between a man and a woman. This question raises the issues of whether gays and lesbians are members of a so-called "suspect class" and whether there is a "fundamental" right to marry.

Chief Justice Roberts ruled on narrower grounds, finding that proponents of ballot initiatives lack the "standing" under Article III, ¨ 2 of the Constitution. Standing, the Court reiterated, is necessary to appeal a case in federal court.

Battle Over CA's Public Records Act Was Actually a Budget Deal

Some of you may have gotten whiplash following the latest kerfuffle over California's Public Records Act (CPRA).

First, as part of the budget deal it looked like there would be limited access to government documents. Why? Because the deal provided that the CPRA would be suspended, instead of paid for from state coffers. Specifically, the state is required to reimburse local agencies for the cost of compliance. The anticipated cost of the CPRA totals in the tens of millions of dollars.

Under the budget plan, local agencies would have the ability to opt out of certain portions of the law, those requiring local agencies to help people trying to access information, provide respond to record requests within 10 days, and furnish people with electronic records when they are obtainable.

Then, predictably, there was a significant backlash. And then, equally predictably, legislators reacted. At the end of last week two State Senators introduced a constitutional amendment purportedly intended to strengthen the CPRA. State President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D - Sacramento) and State Senator Mark Leno (D - San Francisco) introduced an amendment, which would require that local agencies comply with and pay the costs of complying with the CPRA.

Finish reading this post on KCET.org. 

Who’s Killing the Voting Rights Act, Congress or the Supreme Court?

I have a new op-ed in Pacific Standard. 

Here is the last paragraph:

What Congress gave voting rights activists with the creation and re-authorization of Section 5, it took away with its inaction regarding Section 4. And now the Supreme Court has done its part.

Same Sex Marriage: DOMA and Prop 8 Are Dead

Here is a link to my appearance on ABC 7.

What will the Supreme Court say re DOMA & Prop 8?

I'll be on the local ABC news (@ABC7) tonight at 6pm talking about what the Supreme Court is likely to do tomorrow re DOMA and Prop 8.

Down goes Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act

Today, in Shelby v. Holder, the Court's much-anticipated decision regarding the Voting Rights Act, the Court ruled that Section 4 of that act is unconstitutional. Section 4 contains the so-called "coverage formula," used to determine which jurisdictions will be subject to Section 5. Section 5, in turn, requires that certain jurisdictions "pre-clear" any voting changes with the federal government. The Court ruled that the coverage formula, based on voter registration and turnout information from the '60s and '70s, is invalid.
Much more to come. 

Ms. Ravel and Mr. Goodman Go to Washington?

My latest piece on the Huffington Post is here.

Here is an excerpt:

President Obama recently announced the nomination of Democrat Ann Ravel and a Republican Lee Goodman to the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

Ravel is currently the Chairwoman of the California's watchdog agency, the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). She previously served as deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Division of the Department of Justice and was the County Counsel for Santa Clara County, in California.

Goodman is an attorney at the LeClair Ryan law firm who served as an adviser for Ron Paul's 2012 presidential campaign and who has argued for the overturning of campaign finance laws.

Many of you may be asking what the FEC does. Great question. I have a short answer for you: virtually nothing. The FEC is an independent regulatory agency charged with administering and enforcing federal campaign finance laws. Small problem, the FEC doesn't do that.

In the 1970s, in the wake of the Watergate scandals that led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon, Congress enacted the nation's first comprehensive campaign finance framework, the Federal Election Campaign Act. Congress created the FEC to administer and enforce the provisions of the Act. Essentially the FEC should, among other things, work on issues related to campaign disclosure, restrictions on campaign contributions, and public financing of Presidential elections. These issues are vitally important to the integrity of our electoral and political processes.

One of the problems with the FEC is that it is set up to allow for partisan deadlock. The FEC is comprised of six members, there can be no more than three members of the same political party, and four votes are required for the agency to take any action.

Another problem is that the five current members of the FEC are all serving expired terms. These "holdovers" include three Republicans and two Democrats.

The Supreme Court, Rusty the red panda, and Snowden...

As the morning wears on I have grown increasingly concerned that Rusty the red panda has absconded with the Supreme Court's much-anticipated decisions re DOMA, Prop 8, and the VRA, and has headed out trying to find Snowden, who wants to publish the opinions himself. 

Pres. Obama taps FPPC Chair, Ann Ravel, for the FEC

President Obama just announced that he nominated Ann Ravel, the Chairwoman of the Fair Political Practices Commission, to the Federal Elections Commission. I have every confidence that Ann would be a terrific commissioner. She has fought hard for increased disclosure and transparency during her tenure at the FPPC. She continues to wage battles against so-called "dark money" and to push for greater civic engagement. She is smart and practical and I believe she'd make an enormously important contribution as a commissioner on the FEC.

Did Justice Scalia Just Make It Easier To Register To Vote?

My latest op-ed is up on Jurist. 

Here is the last paragraph:

So for those seeing Justice Scalia's decision as a clear statement in favor of easing voter registration requirements, that is simply not the case. This case dealt with whether a federal statute preempts a state law. And the majority gave states a clear roadmap for establishing more stringent voter registration requirements.

"Carl DeMaio’s congressional run and Reform San Diego blur campaign funding lines"

Quoted in this one on KPBS.

The SEC and Dark Political Money

Ciara Torres-Spelliscy blogs re the SEC and dark money here.

Are San Bernardino Recall Efforts Worth the Time and Money?

There is a concerted effort underway to toss out the majority of the City of San Bernardino's elected officials. The recall is targeted at the mayor, the city attorney, and all seven members of the city council. This is significant if only for the sheer number of elected officials that recall proponents are seeking to toss out of office.

I discussed this issue during a "live chat" hosted by the Los Angeles News Group.

Proponents of the recall contend that San Bernardino's elected officials are responsible for driving the city into bankruptcy. Those opposed claim that the recall is actually about the desire of the proponents to sell the city's water system for their own benefit. Opponents are busy circulating an "anti-recall" petition. I will not weigh in here on the propriety of either argument.

Those pushing for the recall are undoubtedly taking an aggressive, partly symbolic stand. The mayor and three City Council members are already up for re-election in November, when the recall election would be held. Further, the mayor has already stated that he will not run for another term.

Finish reading this post on KCET.org. 

ARIZONA ET AL. v. INTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA, INC., ET AL.

The Supreme Court handed down one decision related to election law today. You can find it here.

Justice Scalia wrote the opinion for a 7-2 majority of the Court. The majority found that federal law, the National Voter Registration Act, preemptions state law in this area. The Arizona law required proof of citizenship prior to registering to vote.

More to come.

Total recall -- what does it take to boot elected officials from office?

Looking forward to taking part in this on Monday 6/17/13. 

"Tensions are running high in San Bernardino, where 10 elected leaders are targeted in a massive recall that could change the face of local government and send a pointed message to officials statewide - shape up or face voters' wrath.

Join Loyola professor Jessica Levinson, reporter Ryan Hagen and editorial writer Jessica Keating at noon Monday for a live, interactive chat about the recall process in light of the recent attempt to remove all the elected officials from office in the bankrupt city of San Bernardino.

Pose a question or share your thoughts on the recall and its implications. You can join the conversation here Monday, or send your questions in advance to opinion@langnews.com."

FBI raid reveals need for – and hurdles to – reform

Here is my latest op-ed in today's Sac Bee.

"Calderon is perhaps the latest poster child for politicians behaving badly, but unless there are significant, structural reforms made to our electoral and legislative processes, he will certainly not be the last."

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/06/13/5492578/fbi-raid-reveals-need-for-and.html#storylink=cpy"

Illegal or Immoral? FBI's Look into Legislator Shines Light on Possible Loopholes

Read the beginning of this article on KCET.org. 

The brothers contended that the gifts improved legislative relations between them. It appears that this is all perfectly legal, as is much of Sen. Calderon's activities. For instance, years ago he apologized after inviting hundreds of lobbyists to a fundraiser for the "banking and finance" sector. The reception was held after he was named chairman of the Assembly's Banking and Finance Committee and cost $3,200 per couple. While seemingly distasteful, it does not appear the fundraiser was illegal.

Sen. Calderon also gained some attention recently when he sought upgrades costing approximately $500 to his state-provided car prior to buying that car for personal use.

Does this mean that we should insist on tighter rules regulating gift giving, fundraising, and other activities? Well, no doubt, many of these laws deserve a hard look and the state's watchdog, the Fair Political Practices Commission, has already been doing a wonderful job of doing just that. All of these laws must balance the need to ensure that public officials serve the public, and not themselves, all while not having them work under an overly burdensome, complex, or even confusing regulatory framework. We should not regulate our officials into oblivion or assume that they will always push regulations to the extreme.

But let me be clear, I do not think that regulations are futile. It sometimes feels that with every regulation another loophole will arise and be exploited. But regulatory work is, as I said, a delicate balancing act. And too often regulators are working against the greedy aspects of human nature.

It appears that Calderon used the benefits of public office to his advantage in a fashion that many find somewhere between distasteful and immoral. But not all of his actions are illegal. It in fact remains to be seen whether any are.

Calderon will be termed out in 2014. He is now raising money for possible runs for Assembly or state controller. If you do not like his behavior, a quick way of sending a message to Calderon and others who may share his philosophy is not to vote for him. There is no regulation that can make up for apathetic voters who fail to voice their opinion at the ballot box.