"A New Redistricting Plan for Los Angeles County"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

"This week, by a vote of 4 to 1, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors passed a redistricting plan. Supervisor Gloria Molina was the lone dissenter. The new lines will help determine the makeup of the little known, but very powerful, Board of Supervisors."  

"New campaign finance proposal questioned"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this article in the Redlands Daily Facts.

Here is an excerpt:

Jessica Levinson, a professor of law at Loyola Law School, said Rutherford's call for the FPPC to enforce its ordinance should it pass is a sad reflection of the times in the county.

"It's so depressing when you think about it, the acknowledgement by lawmakers that if we're the ones who appoint people to do this . . . then no one will think that it's bonafide," Levinson said. "That's just a sad statement of the state of civic affairs in San Bernardino County. I think it speaks to all past corruption and scandal."

"Can Californians Gamble Their Way Out of the Budget Deficit?"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

"While fears about consequences to individual gamblers are not unwarranted, neither are worries about the state's lack of funds. We need money, now. This is not a time when we can be picky about the source of revenue coming into the state."

"Street Art: Benefit or Detriment?"

Jessica Levinson's post on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

Prohibiting art, particularly on private property, is a dangerous business. While the City has an interest in ridding the city of violent or offensive graffiti, or even less than that - blight, our lawmakers must be careful not to outlaw murals because they do no like or agree with the message or the messenger.

"FBI, IRS 'anteing up' in Colonies case, says legal expert"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this article in the Contra Costa Times.

Here is an excerpt:


Jessica Levinson, a professor of law at Loyola Law School and no relation to Levenson, said that the federal government anteing up in the Colonies case means something even more far-reaching and serious is at play.
She couldn't say whether the targets of the federal probe could face charges with greater penalties than those in the state's case.

"That totally depends on what they're charged under, and what and if they're convicted of, and which judge sentences them," Levinson said.
She said RICO cases typically apply to organized crime and criminal street gangs, and she isn't aware of any RICO cases that involved government corruption.

"But that doesn't mean it's never happened," she said.

"S.B. COUNTY: Contribution limits eyed"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this piece in the Press Enterprise.


Here is an excerpt:

San Bernardino County supervisors Tuesday endorsed a plan to limit campaign contributions, describing the step as a sign that they are trying to turn around the county's scandal-plagued image. 

Jessica Levinson, a law professor specializing in campaign finance and government at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said the board action was a step toward reform but that the proposal still allows donors to give large sums of money.

She suggested San Bernardino look into smaller limits, similar to other cities or counties instead of state races that might be more expensive to run in. In Los Angeles for example, city-wide candidates are limited to $1,000 and council candidates are limited to $500 per election cycle.
"I think it's a reform that does a little bit of work around the edges but I don't see this as a sweeping overhaul of the government," Levinson said.

"What Will Become of California's Newly Drawn State Senate Districts?"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

For the first time in the state's history, an independent redistricting group drew state legislative and federal congressional district lines. Thanks to two successful ballot measures, those who stand to benefit the most from drawing district lines - sitting lawmakers - were extricated from the process. The independent redistricting commission's charge was, among other things, to create legislative districts which fairly reflected communities of interest, and to pay no heed to whether districts would benefit or harm incumbent lawmakers.

"Our View: Veto the ban on primary election initiatives"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this piece.

"If the people must vote on ballot initiatives, it does make some sense to only permit initiatives to appear during higher turnout elections," wrote Jessica Levinson, a visiting professor at Loyola Law School, in her Monday column on KCET.org. "However, it will also mean that members of the electorate will face perhaps double the number of initiatives on a single election ballot (meaning) …. voters, with limited time and attention spans, could gloss over important decisions.

"Who stands to benefit from SB202? Not surprisingly, it is quite likely that Democrats would profit from the passage of the bill," Levinson writes.

Levinson is right about the number of initiatives. In the 2008 general election, 13 initiatives were on the ballot, which already had voters' heads spinning. If S.B. 202 had been in effect back then, the number would have been 15. In 2000, the combined June-November number would have been 28.

"Three Cheers for the Expo Line!"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

"While it is certainly expensive, so is the cost of so many hours of productivity lost to traffic. That is to say nothing of the hours we don't get to spend with family and friends. In addition, the cost and use of gas is no small issue. I for one would enjoy paying fewer visits to my neighborhood gas station."

"Good News From the Republican Presidential Debate!"

Jessica Levinson's latest piece on the Huffington Post is here.

"Even though, according to many of the Republican presidential candidates who participated in this week's debate, our country is going on a collision course with disaster, it is time to rejoice."

"Editorial: Veto the ban on primary election initiatives"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this editorial in the OC Register.

Here is an excerpt:

“If the people must vote on ballot initiatives, it does make some sense to only permit initiatives to appear during higher turnout elections,” wrote Jessica Levinson, a visiting professor at Loyola Law School, in her Monday column on KCET.org. “However, it will also mean that members of the electorate will face perhaps double the number of initiatives on a single election ballot [meaning] …. voters, with limited time and attention spans, could gloss over important decisions.

“Who stands to benefit from SB202? Not surprisingly, it is quite likely that Democrats would profit from the passage of the bill,” Ms. Levinson writes.
Ms. Levinson is right about the number of initiatives. In the 2008 general election, 13 initiatives were on the ballot, which already had voters’ heads spinning. If SB202 had been in effect back then, the number would have been 15. In 2000, the combined June-November number would have been 28.

"Should We Limit How Often We Can Vote on Ballot Initiatives?"

Jessica Levinson's latest piece on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

If Governor Brown signs SB 202, California would join the great majority of other states with this initiative process, which limit voting on such measures to November elections. As with so many proposed changes to the initiative process, SB 202 is an incremental change that would largely benefit the sponsors of the bill. SB 202 does not provide the type of comprehensive reform that our initiative process so desperately needs. 

"Los Angeles Mayor Urges End to Tax Limits for Businesses"

Jessica Levinson was quoted in this article in the WSJ by the brilliant Tamara Audi.

"Calling California's law limiting property taxes "a corporate tax giveaway," Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said Tuesday he wanted businesses removed from the protections of the measure, known as Proposition 13.

In pressing for the change, Mr. Villaraigosa took on a law considered sacrosanct in state politics, and as antitax sentiment is high nationwide.

Mr. Villaraigosa, a Democrat and president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, said the law—which limits annual property-tax increases to no more than 2%—should apply to homeowners but not corporations.
That change would generate an estimated $2.1 billion to $8 billion annually, he said.

"We could take half the money we generate to fund schools and use the other half to cut taxes for homeowners," Mr. Villaraigosa said during a speech in Sacramento. "We can spur the housing market in the process. Phase it in over time to soften the impact on business."

Supporters of the law rejected Mr. Villaraigosa's suggestion.

"It's the single most devastating policy decision that California can make to adversely affect our economic rebound," said Teresa Casazza, president of the California Taxpayers Association, an advocacy group that represents businesses in the state. "It will significantly increase taxes on small businesses that are trying to create jobs."

Proposition 13, passed by a majority of voters in 1978, transformed California property-tax law and set off a national tax-overhaul movement. and in some cases, forcing residents out of homes when they could no longer afford their tax bills

Under the law, the state's property-tax rate is fixed at 1% of a home's current assessed value, and annual increases are limited unless the property is sold.

Changing Prop 13 most likely would require a ballot initiative approved by voters.

Businesses interests have quashed past attempts at changing the law, said Lenny Goldberg, executive director of the California Tax Reform Association, who has been pressing for this type of change for 15 years.
"I call it the Empire's new clothes. We avert our eyes from this big hole in the system. So thank you Antonio Villaraigosa for making us look at it,'' said Mr. Goldberg. "This is a linchpin of reform for the entire tax system of California.

According to the California Taxpayers Association, which opposes the change, homeowners pay about 40% of the property-tax burden, while "non-homeowners" including businesses and owners of rental properties, pay 60%.

Critics of Prop 13 have said it unfairly burdens homeowners, while letting corporations get around triggering a tax increase when companies change hands or take on new partners.

Still, attempts to change the law, which enjoys wide support among California voters, haven't succeeded. But there has been some support for taxing businesses separately, known as a "split roll." Mr. Villaraigosa's speech reignited the debate over such a change.

"I think it's a step in the right direction," said Lanny Ebenstein, president of the California Center for Public Policy, which supports the mayor's idea.

"This issue comes up every once in a while. It's like a recurring nightmare," said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which pushed for Proposition 13 and opposes a split roll. Mr. Coupal says if the mayor's plan moves forward, "we will do what we've done for 30 years which is to defend Prop. 13."

Both critics and supporters of making such a change said they were unsure if Mr. Villaraigosa's decision to weigh in on the matter would have an impact.

Others wondered at the timing of the speech. The mayor's term ends in 2013, and his political future is unclear.

"I think the mayor is positioning himself to the left of Jerry Brown for governor or for Senate or he wants to go out in 2013 in a blaze of glory saying I was the real Democrat in the state," said Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor and expert in California politics."

The Amazon Sales Tax, a Pipe Dream?

Jessica Levinson will be on KUCI at 9am PDT to discuss.

"Will nonpartisan redistricting maps transform California politics?"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this article in the CSM.

“We lose a lot of expertise when people cycle through and then leave the legislature,” says Jessica Levinson...Lobbyists have more opportunity to pressure novices, she adds.
“It’s an endless dinner buffet for lobbyists because the meal keeps changing,” says Ms. Levinson. “This is not because they are evil people but because their target legislators by definition have a less-entrenched perspective.”

"Republicans Target California's Independent Redistricting Commission"

Click here for more on KCET.org.

"So what are unhappy Republicans to do? As this is California, the answer is: circulate a ballot measure. A handful of Republican State Senators have contributed to a proposed ballot measure, which would repeal the newly drafted Senate districts. Former Governor Pete Wilson has also joined the effort. Thus far, those spear heading the effort to eviscerate the new district lines have raised approximately half a million dollars. The biggest donors are the California Republican Party, and groups that tend to support the GOP."

"If You Get A Dreaded Red Light Ticket, Do You Have to Pay?"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

"It would be nice of one branch, any branch, of our municipal government could work on giving motorists a clear answer. If there is one thing that unites most Angelenos, it is driving and traffic. Now the consequences of what unites us also befuddles us. So much for getting a clear edict from the government."

"California workers wasted state funds, audit says"

Jessica Levinson was quoted in this piece in the SF Chronicle by Joe Garofoli.

Here is an excerpt:

"None of this is going to mean that California doesn't still have a structural deficit," said Jessica Levinson, a professor of law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and political reform expert. "But at a time when people are trying to feed themselves or pay for college, any amount of waste is offensive."

"Dear California Lawmakers: Time to Disclose Your Budgets and Expenditures"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

It is time to enact common sense rules that allow the public to see the money given to and spent by, their elected representatives. If there is truly confidential information, then it should be determined whether such information can be redacted. 

"San Bernardino County supervisors reverse course on naming buildings"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this piece in the Contra Costa Times.

Here is an  excerpt:

Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School, said campaign-contribution limits for state legislators, who typically have a much larger constituent base and whose campaigns are more expensive to run, may not translate well for San Bernardino County's elected officials.

She said the FPPC may lack the resources to do what Rutherford is proposing.

"I think the FPPC is strapped. They're not awash in extra resources," Levinson said.

Still, the fact that the issue remains on the table in San Bernardino County and proposals are being made is a positive sign, Levinson said.


"I think it's a step in the right direction," she said.

"Want to give surplus money to California? Proposal would make it easier"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this article in the Sacramento Bee.

Here is an excerpt:

Jessica Levinson, a political analyst and Loyola Law School professor, said that people tend to prefer giving to a specific cause, not a catch-all like state coffers.

"I think people like more control of their money," she said.

 

Levinson said she would not be surprised if LaMalfa's program eventually were used as a weapon to argue that people are overtaxed already.

Tax opponents could use it as ammunition if Californians are told they can pay higher taxes if they want to, but few do, she said.

"They'll say, 'Look, no one pays,' " Levinson said.

 

"How Much Does it Cost to be Mayor of Los Angeles?"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

One of the problems with our current system is that fundraising prowess is used as a proxy for popularity. There is, of course, some correlation. However, fundraising ability, at most, demonstrates popularity with a certain segment of society, those who can and want to give campaign contributions.

So let's try to hear from all the candidates, and not make the balance of their bank accounts the only thing by which we measure their ability to lead the city. The best fundraiser may make the best mayor. But in the words of the Gershwins, "It ain't necessarily so."

"Dear Californians, You Don't Matter"

Click here for a KCET article about California's endorsement of the National Popular Vote program. It would change the way we elect presidents.

"Redistricting panel is expected to approve new maps"

The LAT has more.

"Calif. Redistricting Likely To Have National Impact "

WMUK has more.

"Redistricting, Round Two: Drawing Local Legislative Lines"

Jessica Levinson's latest article on KCET.org is here. 


Here is an excerpt:


"Just when you thought we were almost done talking about redistricting, it's time to refuel and prepare for another round of discussions about legislative line drawing - this time on the local level. The latest redistricting battle concerns lines for the little known, but super power powerful five-member Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors."

"County redistricting starting to heat up"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this article in the Daily Breeze.

Here is an excerpt:

In a Q&A below, Jessica Levinson -- a Loyola Law School professor and moderator of a recent Zócalo Public Square panel on redistricting -- makes the case for why this really matters.

Q: What's at stake in the Los Angeles County redistricting process -- for the supervisors and for county residents?

The composition of the little-known, but nonetheless uber-powerful, Board of Supervisors will be determined in the Los Angeles County redistricting process. This mighty group is limited to three consecutive four-year terms. The group is so powerful that it has been nicknamed the "five kings."

Every 10 years we count how many people live in legislative districts throughout the country, including the five supervisorial districts for the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors. Boundary lines are drawn based on the number and local and residents in those districts. This redistrict process occurs to ensure that residents in each district are fairly represented.  

Q: Why should your average citizen -- or non-citizen -- care about this fairly obscure process?

The five-member, non-partisan county Board of Supervisors make up the county's governing body. Their decisions can have sweeping, significant repercussions for the residents of the County.

 With only five members and so many residents in the county, each member represents (almost) 2 million people. About 25 percent of the state's residents live in Los Angels County. Therefore, these five individuals wield enormous influence. Again, the way the boundary lines are drawn will help to determine who can be victorious in each of those five districts. 

Q. So why isn't anyone really paying attention to the county's redistricting? Do you expect that to change when board hearings start next week?

First, the independent redistricting, which has just released its final maps for state and congressional legislative districts, sucked up much of the oxygen in the redistricting debate. 

The Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing about proposed boundary lines next week, and I expect politicos, policy wonks, and interested persons will then turn part of their attention to the County's redistricting process.

Second, who among us can even name all of the members of the Board of Supervisors? If we can't name them, and possibly don't know what they do, we're not going to be particularly enthralled by the process of drawing new boundary lines for them.

"Do Californians Have the Right to See the Current Budgets and Expenditures of their Lawmakers?"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

"Legal Defense Funds: An Ethical Dilemma?"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

"[Villaraigosa] committed ethical violations and then he raised private funds to cover the costs of those violations. In essence the mayor's initial failure to disclose free tickets given to him -- very likely in attempt to curry favor with him -- has provided the mayor with yet another fundraising opportunity, and hence another crop of donors perhaps trying to curry their own favor with our city's chief executive."

"US Debt Deal Likely To Cut Billions in Calif. Health Care, Education"

Jessica Levinson's interview on KNX 1070 is here. 


“I think that we could see cuts everywhere,” said Jessica Levinson, a visiting professor at Loyola Law School who studies political reform and budgetary issues. “I think there will be a new normal in which it’s not realistic to say, ‘This sector has to remain untouched’.”

"Re-Drawing California's Political Landscape"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

"Is It Time to Take Away My Right to Vote... For Judicial Candidates?"

The WSJ links to Jessica Levinson's most recent piece on Huffington Post here.

"Louisiana candidates owe total of $1 million in campaign fines"

The Town Talk has more.

"Mitt Romney Super PAC Raises $12 Million From Wealthy Donors"

Huffington Post has more.

"GOP fundraising far behind what it was 4 years ago"

The Des Moines Register has more.

More on the "final" redistricting plan in California

More from Politico, WaPo, LAT, AP, and NYT.  

"GOP crying foul over California redistricting"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this piece in the L.A. Daily News.


The shakeout from the commission's new maps remains to be seen, according to Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School. But she predicts there will be roughly 12 competitive congressional districts to emerge from the redrawn lines.

"Either it's incumbents, or the (voter) registration numbers show it could go either way," she said of the potentially combative districts.
Levinson also said that Republicans mistakenly believed that an independent commission re-drawing the lines, rather than members of a Democratic-heavy Legislature in Sacramento, could benefit them.
"The Republicans," she said, "didn't realize that they could get hurt."

More coverage of the release of California's final redistricting plans

More from the Hill, Sac Bee, KPBS, and Mercury News. 

"California's final redistricting plan released"

KPCC has more here.

"Redistricting commission inches closer to forming districts"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this article in the Santa Monica Daily Press.

"To be faced with a district where you've lost a majority of support must feel like a rug being pulled out from under you," said Jessica A. Levinson, a professor at the Loyola School of Law. "I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but it's very challenging for incumbents who find themselves in the same district as another incumbent, or in one that doesn't play to their strengths."

...

"These are not map makers, they're not elected, so who are they accountable to?" Levinson said. "Well, legislators may be more experienced in drawing lines, but there's an inherent conflict of interests when they do. I prefer someone with less of a dog in the fight."

"SEBA fund at issue: Witnesses say Erwin sought more power"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this article in the Contra Costa Times.


But if the allegations are true, it is a quintessential example of laundering campaign contributions that "flies in the face of the law," said Jessica Levinson, a professor of government ethics and political reform at Loyola Law School.

"All around it's such a disappointing and offensive tale of badly behaving politicians and badly behaving donors," Levinson said. "It just looks like a systematic use of money and PACs to peddle influence and get access."

"Goodbye Term Limits?"

Jessica Levinson's latest piece on KCET.org is here.

Here is an excerpt:

I think term limits should be repealed all together. Under the current regime lawmakers do not have the time to develop the knowledge and expertise necessary to develop into topnotch (or at least better) legislators. That means lawmakers are more heavily dependent on staffers and lobbyists, two unelected groups who we may not want running things from behind closed doors. In addition, lawmakers are consistently eying the next prize. Presumably, and quite naturally, lawmakers will be distracted by trying land their next political job.

"A ballot box battle brewing over the 'Amazon tax'"

Jessica Levinson has this piece in Loyola Law School's "Summary Judgments" blog, also appearing in this Los Angeles Daily Journal.

Here is an excerpt:

A small but well-publicized part of California's newly enacted budget, the so-called "Amazon tax," looks to be the catalyst behind California's next big ballot initiative battle. The law requires Internet retailers with a "physical presence" in the state to collect a sales tax from customers in the state and expands the definition of physical presence to include online retailers that have related companies or affiliates in the state. After the passage of the law, Amazon promptly cut ties with approximately 10,000 affiliates in the state.

"California Courts in Crisis"

Jessica Levinson is interviewed on Warren Olney's, "Which Way, L.A.?" on KCRW.

"COLONIES: Postmus was 'news wire' to opposition"

Jessica Levinson is quoted in this piece in the Press Enterprise.


Jessica Levinson, a law professor with Loyola Law School in Los Angeles who specializes in government ethics, called such leaks offensive and a betrayal of the confidentiality of closed session. California government bodies are allowed under the Brown Act to discuss legal strategy behind closed doors to protect sensitive information, and releasing that information violates that law, she said.
"I think it basically decimates the ability to negotiate a fair and just settlement," she said.
"It's like playing cards with someone who knows what your card is. It becomes kind of a pointless exercise."

"California Courts in Crisis"

Jessica Levinson will be on "Which Way, L.A.?" tonight at 7pm PT talking about budget cuts in the California court system. Click here for more.

"What if Carmageddon was Electoralypse?"

Jessica Levinson's latest piece on KCET is here.

Here is an excerpt:

Imagine, if you will, an alternative universe in which we pay as much attention to our political, governmental and electoral processes as we have to a potential two-day traffic jam.

"'Sister Wives' file lawsuit to prevent criminal polygamy charges"

Jessica Levinson is quoted here.

Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, says the Browns will argue that criminalizing polygamy violates the 14th Amendment’s guarantees of due process and equal protection, as well as the First Amendment’s clauses guaranteeing the free exercise of religion, free speech, and freedom of association.
“Kody Brown is saying it all boils down to holding that if you can’t criminalize private, same-sex conduct, then why can you criminalize polygamists?” says Ms. Levinson.

"Re-Shaping California's Political Landscape One Line at a Time"

Jessica Levinson blogs here.

The following is an excerpt:

"The political blood sport, commonly known as redistricting, hit a fever pitch on June 10, when California's newly-minted independent redistricting commission presented draft maps to the public.
Simply put, every 10 years we count how many people live here, and then we draw legislative lines according to that demographic information. While this may not sound particularly spicy, determining who draws district lines and how those lines are drawn evokes a legal and political struggle of epic proportions. Political wonks, voting rights attorneys, and interested members of the public know that where district lines are drawn can dictate the composition and balance of power in the state legislatures and Congress."

"Carmageddon: A Worthless Ordeal?"

Jessica Levinson's latest post on KCET.org is here.

Recently I wrote about the upcoming apocalypse fondly called "Carmaggedon." My perspective on the Carmaggedon controversy has been, "no pain, go gain." While living through 53 hours of heavy traffic due to the closure of the 405 surely will not be pleasant, I thought it certainly must be worth it for the long-term good. A wider freeway must mean less traffic, right?