State Capitol, Sacramento. (Photo: Wikimedia)ANALYSIS: When we think of “special interests,” we most often associate them with lobbying legislators. However, interest groups not only actively lobby in the legislative arena, but also they are active in efforts to influence state agencies and their regulatory activities. These interest groups vary depending on the role and function of the particular state agency.
State Senate Leader Kevin de León on Feb. 1, 2014, at the Golden Dragon Parade in Los Angeles(Photo: Betto Rodrigues, via Shutterstock)GRIZZLY BEAR PROJECT: After some hard feelings and bruised egos, De León accepted his defeat and ran for the Senate seat that he never really wanted. But in the Senate, de León has matured and grown as a legislator. Early on, he helped ease roadblocks between the Senate and the governor’s office. In the meantime, he reconstructed and expanded his personal relationships, and was elected by his colleagues last year as the new leader of the state Senate.
Congressional districts in the Inland Empire, approved by California's redistricting commission in 2011. (Map: Ballotpedia)ANALYSIS: A case before the U.S. Supreme Court, with arguments set to be heard on March 2, could reduce the role of the State Redistricting Commission, invalidate the 2011 Congressional lines, and hand to the legislature the immediate responsibility of redrawing 53 valuable seats.
California’s voter-approved commission that draws the boundaries for legislative and congressional districts is going to the U.S. Supreme Court to support a similar commission in Arizona, which is locked in a power struggle with that state’s Legislature.
The state Capitol in Sacramento, ground floor near the West Steps. (Photo: Trekandshoot, via Shutterstock)OPINION: What causes gridlock in the legislative process? Has it been getting worse over time? And, what can be done to lessen the conditions that promote gridlock and increase the conditions that promote compromise?
State Capitol, Sacramento. (Photo: David Monniaux)California’s political watchdog, facing 2014’s high-stakes statewide elections in which a relatively small number of donors put in more than $158 million to influence voters on ballot propositions, closed hundreds of cases with settlements – the most in its 40 years of existence.
Lobbyist Bev Hansen, left, and her fellow advocates in an Assembly corridor just days before the end of the 2014 session. (Photo: Rich Pedroncelli/AP)While most people have heard of lobbyists and have a general idea of what the lobbying profession is about, few understand the breadth and complexity of this work and the important role that lobbyists play in developing state policy. When I first began lobbying, long-time relationships ruled the process, there was far more bipartisan collaboration, and individual legislators wielded enormous clout.
Before the Nov. 4 general election, California’s political watchdog examined “every advertisement relating to state and local ballot measures” – a total of 172 state and local propositions – and ordered corrections in 19 of them, mostly for failing to make it clear who was financing the ads.
Voter Ben Rich casts his ballot at the Venice Beach lifeguard headquarters. (Photo: AP/Jae C. Hong)Though the final chapter is still unwritten on Election 2014, we know this much: Republicans took advantage of a traditional dip in midterm turnout and some big spending in targeted races to pick up enough legislative seats to end Democrats’ supermajorities in both houses. The GOP picked off two Democratic Assembly incumbents – Steve Fox, D-Palmdale, and Sharon Quirk-Silva, D-Fullerton — and were headed to unseat a third – Freshman Assemblyman Al Marutsuchi, D-Torrance.
Led by medical insurers, opponents of two November ballot initiatives aimed at regulating insurance rates, raising the limits on pain-and-suffering awards and requiring doctors to be drug tested have raised nearly $92 million from their largest donors, according to figures compiled by the state’s political watchdog.