california update - 9 / 4 / 2001 executive summary
? several procedural scenarios that might play out regarding the edison mou .
? a snapshot analysis of the political dynamics that affect the outcome .
procedural scenarios
assembly
the assembly appropriations committee ' s plan to take up sb 78 xx today will likely be a pro forma hearing moving the bill forward to the full assembly on a party line vote . while the controversial land easements amendments had been removed as of friday ' s draft bill , it is rumored that the amendments may have returned over the weekend . if the problematic " shaver lake " provisions are removed from the bill , assembly members may not hear much vocal public opposition from their constituents about rejecting the bill ( although consumer groups are opposed and are trying to generate grass roots opposition ) . if the shaver lake amendments remain , several central valley legislators may oppose the plan in committee .
assembly speaker bob hertzberg supports this edison deal , and the business community supports some recent amendments . this likely mitigates concerns from other pro - business democrats . with or without the shaver lake provisions , hertzberg should get at least 41 democratic members ( and probably a few more ) , but no more than 2 republicans ( if any ) to vote aye on the bill . hertzberg has more than enough votes to spare from his caucus - he needs 41 votes for the bill to pass , and there are 50 democrats in his caucus . if the vote is close , a personal plea from him and / or the governor should enable him to get to 41 .
senate
the bill would next move to the senate for approval of the assembly ' s amendments . this is where the prognosticating gets difficult . senate president pro tem john burton has said he does not support any amendments to sb 78 xx . gov . davis and speaker hertzberg will likely meet several times with burton to try to cut a deal , but relations between davis and burton are currently frayed ( due to a variety of factors ) , and burton is not one to back down from a position unless there is something in it for him to change his position .
this would lead to one of four scenarios :
? burton refuses to have the bill heard in the senate , and no edison mou bill is approved before sept . 15 th ,
? burton agrees to let the bill be heard despite his opposition ( this option is unlikely ) ,
? burton comes to a deal with davis and hertzberg and brings the bill ( as it is passed by the assembly ) for a vote in the full senate with his support ,
? burton comes to a deal with davis and hertzberg , but as part of the deal , he insists on changes in the bill - thereby sending it back to the assembly for more amendments , and another vote in the assembly - before a vote in the senate .
john burton is considered one of the smartest , and certainly the cleverest politician in california state government today , so it is problematic to guess his next move . additionally , external factors play into the determination of which of these options will result . for instance , the governor may be willing to cut a deal with burton on an unrelated issue that burton cares more about resolving his way ( e . g . workers compensation benefits , drug courts , reapportionment ) . foretelling what will happen in the senate is extremely difficult . but davis and hertzberg will try to cut a deal with him , and given burton ' s past actions , he may string them along , holding out for several days ( maybe even until sept . 14 th ) before he agrees to anything .
governor
assuming the bill escapes the senate ( and more deals may need to be cut to get enough votes ) the governor will almost certainly sign it , regardless of edison ' s public position . the bill will go into effect 90 days after the governor signs it .
consumer groups have vowed to undo any " edison bailout " enacted into law by way of the ballot box . that could be either ( 1 ) an initiative to pass another bill overturning sb 78 xx and replacing it with other provisions , or ( 2 ) a referendum to repeal sb 78 xx , making it as if the bill was never passed at all .
initiative
once drafted and submitted to the attorney general , it takes 15 days to receive an official title and summary , and another 25 days if the ag determines that a fiscal estimate is necessary . after either the 15 or 40 days , the attorney general sends it to the proponents , the senate , the assembly , and the secretary of state . the day it is mailed is called the summary date . that is the day upon which all calculations are made .
the proponents are allowed a maximum of 150 days to circulate petitions and collect signatures . however , the initiative measure must qualify at least 131 days before the statewide election in which it is to be submitted to the voters . therefore it is past the deadline to qualify for the next statewide election , on march 5 , 2002 ( statewide primaries ) , and so , could not qualify until the statewide general election on november 5 , 2002 . however the window is tight for that election , as well , and a proposal would need to be submitted to the attorney general by the end of september 2001 to qualify for november 2002 .
the legislature may conduct public hearings on the proposed initiative , but cannot amend it . so whatever is submitted is what goes on the ballot . an initiative requires the gathering of signatures equal to five percent of the total votes cast for governor in the preceding gubernatorial election ( 419 , 260 signatures ) . the ability to collect signature is heavily dependent on the amount of money the proponents have to pay signature gatherers . it seems unlikely that the consumer groups will be able to raise that kind of money quickly , but harvey rosenfield of the foundation for taxpayer & consumer rights has been successful at placing pro - consumer initiatives on the ballot before , including prop . 9 in 1998 , which sought to undo ab 1890 before the public understood its ramifications .
referendum
referenda on the ballot are fairly rare in comparison to initiatives , although a successful referendum was on the march 7 , 2000 ballot . prior to that , the last four questions placed before the voters appeared on the june 1982 primary election ballot . all four were defeated . since 1912 , there have been approximately 50 attempts to qualify referenda for the ballot . of the 50 attempts , 39 qualified for the ballot , 26 of which prevented legislative statutes from taking effect . the circulation calendar , verification , timing , and the form of petition have different requirements than initiatives . for example , the california constitution requires that the process must be completed within ninety days of the enactment of the bill that is being referred . the signature requirements are the same for a referendum as an initiative statute , though .
political dynamics
notwithstanding the governor ' s and assembly speaker ' s desire to enact an edison rescue package , senate president pro tem john burton is in the driver ' s seat . in fact , as noted above , there is a perception among some that it is the governor who needs burton and not the other way around . one business source close to the negotiations believes burton is not inclined to ask his members to make a second vote for an edison bailout . in fact , members of both houses are worried about being perceived as bailing out the hobbled utility , their reluctance fed by generators ' lobbyists who are sharing survey data that indicates voters blame the utilities for the energy mess and oppose any bailout .
currently , due largely to this dynamic and others such as the shaver lake issue , there are not 41 votes for an edison rescue in the assembly . we believe this will change as the governor and the speaker exert their influence , and the bill will pass the assembly . as difficult as it is to make predictions regarding the assembly , the state senate presents an even larger challenge . however , at this point it is our opinion that the odds of an edison rescue package being approved by the state senate are less than 50 percent .
california update - 9 / 4 / 2001
executive summary
? several procedural scenarios that might play out regarding the edison mou .
? a snapshot analysis of the political dynamics that affect the outcome .
procedural scenarios
assembly
the assembly appropriations committee ' s plan to take up sb 78 xx today will likely be a pro forma hearing moving the bill forward to the full assembly on a party line vote . while the controversial land easements amendments had been removed as of friday ' s draft bill , it is rumored that the amendments may have returned over the weekend . if the problematic " shaver lake " provisions are removed from the bill , assembly members may not hear much vocal public opposition from their constituents about rejecting the bill ( although consumer groups are opposed and are trying to generate grass roots opposition ) . if the shaver lake amendments remain , several central valley legislators may oppose the plan in committee .
assembly speaker bob hertzberg supports this edison deal , and the business community supports some recent amendments . this likely mitigates concerns from other pro - business democrats . with or without the shaver lake provisions , hertzberg should get at least 41 democratic members ( and probably a few more ) , but no more than 2 republicans ( if any ) to vote aye on the bill . hertzberg has more than enough votes to spare from his caucus - he needs 41 votes for the bill to pass , and there are 50 democrats in his caucus . if the vote is close , a personal plea from him and / or the governor should enable him to get to 41 .
senate
the bill would next move to the senate for approval of the assembly ' s amendments . this is where the prognosticating gets difficult . senate president pro tem john burton has said he does not support any amendments to sb 78 xx . gov . davis and speaker hertzberg will likely meet several times with burton to try to cut a deal , but relations between davis and burton are currently frayed ( due to a variety of factors ) , and burton is not one to back down from a position unless there is something in it for him to change his position .
this would lead to one of four scenarios :
? burton refuses to have the bill heard in the senate , and no edison mou bill is approved before sept . 15 th ,
? burton agrees to let the bill be heard despite his opposition ( this option is unlikely ) ,
? burton comes to a deal with davis and hertzberg and brings the bill ( as it is passed by the assembly ) for a vote in the full senate with his support ,
? burton comes to a deal with davis and hertzberg , but as part of the deal , he insists on changes in the bill - thereby sending it back to the assembly for more amendments , and another vote in the assembly - before a vote in the senate .
john burton is considered one of the smartest , and certainly the cleverest politician in california state government today , so it is problematic to guess his next move . additionally , external factors play into the determination of which of these options will result . for instance , the governor may be willing to cut a deal with burton on an unrelated issue that burton cares more about resolving his way ( e . g . workers compensation benefits , drug courts , reapportionment ) . foretelling what will happen in the senate is extremely difficult . but davis and hertzberg will try to cut a deal with him , and given burton ' s past actions , he may string them along , holding out for several days ( maybe even until sept . 14 th ) before he agrees to anything .
governor
assuming the bill escapes the senate ( and more deals may need to be cut to get enough votes ) the governor will almost certainly sign it , regardless of edison ' s public position . the bill will go into effect 90 days after the governor signs it .
consumer groups have vowed to undo any " edison bailout " enacted into law by way of the ballot box . that could be either ( 1 ) an initiative to pass another bill overturning sb 78 xx and replacing it with other provisions , or ( 2 ) a referendum to repeal sb 78 xx , making it as if the bill was never passed at all .
initiative
once drafted and submitted to the attorney general , it takes 15 days to receive an official title and summary , and another 25 days if the ag determines that a fiscal estimate is necessary . after either the 15 or 40 days , the attorney general sends it to the proponents , the senate , the assembly , and the secretary of state . the day it is mailed is called the summary date . that is the day upon which all calculations are made .
the proponents are allowed a maximum of 150 days to circulate petitions and collect signatures . however , the initiative measure must qualify at least 131 days before the statewide election in which it is to be submitted to the voters . therefore it is past the deadline to qualify for the next statewide election , on march 5 , 2002 ( statewide primaries ) , and so , could not qualify until the statewide general election on november 5 , 2002 . however the window is tight for that election , as well , and a proposal would need to be submitted to the attorney general by the end of september 2001 to qualify for november 2002 .
the legislature may conduct public hearings on the proposed initiative , but cannot amend it . so whatever is submitted is what goes on the ballot . an initiative requires the gathering of signatures equal to five percent of the total votes cast for governor in the preceding gubernatorial election ( 419 , 260 signatures ) . the ability to collect signature is heavily dependent on the amount of money the proponents have to pay signature gatherers . it seems unlikely that the consumer groups will be able to raise that kind of money quickly , but harvey rosenfield of the foundation for taxpayer & consumer rights has been successful at placing pro - consumer initiatives on the ballot before , including prop . 9 in 1998 , which sought to undo ab 1890 before the public understood its ramifications .
referendum
referenda on the ballot are fairly rare in comparison to initiatives , although a successful referendum was on the march 7 , 2000 ballot . prior to that , the last four questions placed before the voters appeared on the june 1982 primary election ballot . all four were defeated . since 1912 , there have been approximately 50 attempts to qualify referenda for the ballot . of the 50 attempts , 39 qualified for the ballot , 26 of which prevented legislative statutes from taking effect . the circulation calendar , verification , timing , and the form of petition have different requirements than initiatives . for example , the california constitution requires that the process must be completed within ninety days of the enactment of the bill that is being referred . the signature requirements are the same for a referendum as an initiative statute , though .
political dynamics
notwithstanding the governor ' s and assembly speaker ' s desire to enact an edison rescue package , senate president pro tem john burton is in the driver ' s seat . in fact , as noted above , there is a perception among some that it is the governor who needs burton and not the other way around . one business source close to the negotiations believes burton is not inclined to ask his members to make a second vote for an edison bailout . in fact , members of both houses are worried about being perceived as bailing out the hobbled utility , their reluctance fed by generators ' lobbyists who are sharing survey data that indicates voters blame the utilities for the energy mess and oppose any bailout .
currently , due largely to this dynamic and others such as the shaver lake issue , there are not 41 votes for an edison rescue in the assembly . we believe this will change as the governor and the speaker exert their influence , and the bill will pass the assembly . as difficult as it is to make predictions regarding the assembly , the state senate presents an even larger challenge . however , at this point it is our opinion that the odds of an edison rescue package being approved by the state senate are less than 50 percent .