California voters could shape the nation.In California, the 2012 election cycle will be one of the most watched, hyped and over-analyzed ever, but not for the usual reasons.
Compared to the 2010 election cycle, California would not appear to figure prominently in terms of national interest: After all, there will be no hotly contested presidential primary, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein is so invulnerable that the best known Republican who dared to file against her is Orly Taitz. Even so, many eyes will be on California this June?not only because California could be the key to a Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives, but also because how California voters respond to recent changes in election law could be the factor for whether such attempts at reform succeed or fail in other states.
Two recent major changes to California's elections have shaken up the way the state's politicians and candidates usually do business. Traditionally, the Democratic-controlled legislature had the power to draw new decennial legislative and congressional boundaries after every census. This process ensured that Democratic incumbents would, for the most part, have safe districts to run in, with the districts that were drawn to be Republican ending up competitive once in a blue moon, depending on demographic shifts and voter attitudes. In 2008, however, voters passed Proposition 11 by less than two percentage points. This measure took the power to draw legislative districts out of the hands of the legislature, and put it in the hands of an independent redistricting commission (a later measure expanded the mandate of this commission to redraw congressional district lines as well). In drawing its final maps, the commissioners are not allowed to consider party affiliation or the residence locations of individual legislators.
For a variety of reasons, the new configurations promise better results for Democrats overall, especially in races for Congress and the state Senate: Even though the partisan advantages are not as strong, there are more seats that Democrats should win. The wrinkle, however, comes in the fact that unlike redistricting jobs done by the legislature, the redistricting commission designed maps that did not take incumbents' residency into consideration. In some cases, more than one incumbent was drawn into the same district, forcing some to either scramble for new districts, or run against each other.
But that's not the only wrinkle. In 2010, the state's voters also passed Proposition 14, which abolished partisan primaries in favor of a so-called "top two" primary in which all candidates from all parties appear on the primary ballot and declare their party preference, or no preference at all. The only reason Proposition 14 made it onto the ballot at all was because of our former state Sen. and Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado. During his time in the state Senate, Mr. Maldonado, who realized that he would likely never win a Republican primary in the state because of Republican racism, was the one Republican vote Democrats were targeting in order to meet the requisite two-thirds vote to pass a budget. In exchange for his "aye" vote, a deal was struck to put Proposition 14 on the ballot.
The theory behind Proposition 14 was that since candidates are now required to appeal to all voters in the primary as opposed to merely the ones in their own party, moderates and centrists will do better. But the most tangible effect could be very negative for Democrats. Because the top two candidates advance to the general election regardless of party, hotly contested Democratic districts could face a situation where two popular Democrats advance to the general election and are forced to fight through November what in normal circumstances would have been resolved in June.
Combine the first go-around with the top-two primary and all-new districts, and it adds up to a very unpredictable election. With that in mind, here are some races to watch on June 5th, as well as some potential implications.
Further to the northwest, Republican Congressman Elton Gallegly's 24th District, centered around coastal Ventura County, was redrawn to lean Democratic. This prompted Gallegly to retire, leaving the seat (numbered the 26th) open. Unlike the 41st, however, the dynamics of this race are more complicated. The leading Democrat is progressive Assemblymember Julia Brownley, who will be opposed by conservative Republican state Sen. Tony Strickland. The wild card in the race, however, is Ventura County Supervisor Linda Parks. Formerly a moderate Republican who received bitter challenges for her seat from Tony's wife Audra, Parks recently left the Republican Party and is running for Congress under the banner of "no party preference" (while making the weirdest ad so far this cycle). This is exactly the situation proponents of Proposition 14 had in mind: Will the avowedly centrist and non-partisan campaign of Linda Parks propel her into the top two, or will Brownley and Strickland face off against each other in a more traditional matchup?
Among challenges to incumbents, perhaps the top race will be in the 7th District, where Dr. Ami Bera will be issuing his third straight solid challenge to Republican Dan Lungren?but this time, on more favorable turf.
Meanwhile, in the 44th Congressional District in South Los Angeles, freshman Congresswoman Janice Hahn, who first won a seat in the special election to replace Jane Harman after her retirement from the 36th District, will face off against Congresswoman Laura Richardson. There are unavoidable racial dynamics in this district: It is a majority African-American district, but Janice Hahn, who is white, used to represent a substantial part of it on the Los Angeles City Council and remains popular here. Hahn won the overwhelming endorsement of the California Democratic Party over Richardson, who has been under a constant cloud of ethics violations for some time. This one could get ugly: Richardson has shown that she is not above using identity politics to win a seat. Whether that will work against Janice Hahn remains to be seen.
There's an outside chance that Democrats could achieve a two-thirds threshold in the state Assembly as well, but everything would have to go right. The main priority for Democrats is in the newly created 66th District, which encompasses the so-called South Bay in the greater Los Angeles area. This is a very swingy district with a marginal Democratic registration advantage. The leading Democrat in this race, Al Muratsuchi, is being opposed by two tea party Republicans, including Craig Huey. For those unfamiliar with Craig Huey, he ran unsuccessfully against now-Congresswoman Janice Hahn in the aforementioned special election, and his allies are responsible for what could be considered the most racist, sexist and generally reprehensible campaign ad of all time.
But the Assembly race that many locals are observing more than any other is a Democratic dogfight in Assembly District 50. This deep blue seat in West Los Angeles and Malibu is expected to be a battle royale between current Assemblymember Betsy Butler and longtime progressive activist Torie Osborn. Butler represents much of the turf that is now in the aforementioned district 66; however, her residence was redistricted into a third district that already contained a sitting Assemblymember who represented a much larger portion of their mutual district. Rather than face a more difficult fight in the 66th, Butler chose to move to the new 50th District, even though she only represents about one percent of it currently. Problem? Torie Osborn, who is a legend in the LGBT and social justice movements, had been running for whichever seat emerged for that region for a long time, and had already garnered a broad fundraising base and important local endorsements. What has followed is a classic "activists versus institutions" slugfest that is straining friendships and dividing traditional allies. While Butler has the official support of the California Democratic Party, Osborn has gained the support of nearly every single local Democratic club in the district. Local progressives are hoping to propel Osborn to victory to have a progressive activist who is unafraid to challenge the orthodoxy, while Butler has raised a large portion of her money from fellow politicians in Sacramento. There is a third Democrat running who is going to gain some support, as well as one Republican. While the ideal outcome of this race in June from a generic Democratic perspective would be to have the three Democrats split the vote in such a way that the lone Republican advances to the runoff in this deep blue seat, the likelihood is that Butler and Osborn will advance to the general election and slug this out through November. Who wins this could have significant ramifications on future candidacies in redistricting years: If Osborn is able to take this seat despite the full power of Sacramento supporting Butler, it might provide impetus for other challengers to buck the system in redistricting years. But if Butler is able to move into a district she doesn't represent and have Sacramento money and endorsements carry her to victory over a powerful candidate like Osborn, it might similarly dissuade others from making such challenges in the future. Therefore, while most other people might be wondering what the big deal is, the results of this race will resonate deeply within the halls of power here in California.
These are just some of the things to watch for as the California returns come in on June 5th. How will it end up? Stay tuned. On June 10th, I'll analyze the carnage?live from Netroots Nation in Providence, Rhode Island.
DISCLOSURE: I have endorsed both Brad Sherman and Janice Hahn. In addition to endorsing Torie Osborn, I have also volunteered extensively for her campaign.